Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/1990, 1 - TENTATIVE MAP ENDA ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN 90_ --- 1. TENTATIVE MAP - EDNA-ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN (JONAS/410 - 90 min. ) Staff is working on report. Will be sent out under separate cover. MEETING DATE: city of San WIS ostspo &-40-ITEM 90 AGENDA REPORT NUMBER: FROM: Arnold Jonas Community Development Dire for PREPARED BY: Judith L utner, Associate Planner SUBJECT: a. ) Tract 1750: A subdivision to reate 245 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: 1) Adopt a resolution approving the tentative map, with conditions. 2) Pass to print an ordinance approving the planned development rezoning. 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. Several maps had been approved and homes constructed when in 1989, a vesting tentative map (Tract 1360 - subdivider: John French) to subdivide most of 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. Construction of that phase, consisting of 131 lots, is also close to complete. The applicants are now asking for approval of a vesting tentative map to 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. The issues of greatest concern to the Planning Commission were: Specific pian 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 RECEIVE ® MAY 2 91990 crny CLEW �' MEETING DATE: �' `I'Iip� Pt�llll city of San LUIS OBISpo ITEM COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B 1107 Tank Farm Road Page 2 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 upper limits of development against the side of Islay Hill 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 among themselves on the significance of the changes, but in their action found the project consistent with the specific plan. 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, and the Planning Commission approved it as requested. 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 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 previously approved 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 potentially 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 decide if the alternative chosen, involving a combination of distance and sound walls for mitigation, is acceptable. ���fi��Nlllylj�I��III�Y'NIII�IIIII c,"J O f SAn LUIS OBISPO l MEETING DATE: ,`IUu COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B 1107 Tank Farm Road Page 3 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. Recommendation: Staff is recommending that the council approve the planned development and the tentative map, with several conditions, including a condition to limit lots on the easterly hillside to below the street, as shown on the specific plan, and a requirement for the developer to fund a study to limit impacts on the pond turtles. The staff recommendation differs from the Planning Commission recommendation in that the Planning Commission allowed uphill lots on the easterly hillside. If the council needs additional information or would like to see changes to the map, a continuance will be required. 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 six 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, and May 14, 1990, and granted schematic approval to those designs. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the Rodriguez Park site in June, 1989, and 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 (CHC) visited the adobe site and discussed the use of the adobe. That committee reviewed the proposed adobe park site on April 23, 1990, and recommended approval with a stipulation that houses /-3 MEETING GATE: �' � illllidll ��ll► city of San tins osIspo Nij% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B 1107 Tank Farm Road Page 4 surrounding the adobe site be reviewed by the CHC to assure compatibility with the adobe and maintenance of views. 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 Road 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. 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.) 111 large "custom" lots, averaging 9,900 square feet; 5.) An easement, to be dedicated to the city, over 75 acres of open space (Islay Hill) , with a contribution for trail construction; 6.) A combined city and linear park, totalling over 13 acres, to be dedicated to the city; . / - #4� `�II���IIIyIII,II�IIIII�II�IIIUII� city of san tuts OBlspo MEnNGDATE: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT '"NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 5 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 WATER 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 previous city attorney 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. Such notes have been required on other maps recently, and 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. Approximately seventeen existing homes would have to be retrofitted for each lot developed. 2. Well site. If a well can be developed on site, 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 Hill, 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, as developed, would not attract attention. /_ ��miFGIWI�IIlIu�1�u!NIIIIIIu�s oBIsPo -_ MEETING DATE: U cityo San COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT REM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 6 The Planning Commission supported the well use in the open space area. The use of the open space area for a well is consistent with uses otherwise allowed in this zone, although the zoning regulations are silent on the subject of wells. The city has located its wells in open space areas without special approvals. 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. CONSISTENCY ISSUES 3. 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 the finding that changes to the layout of land use do not significantly affect a planning concept spelled out in the specific plan. 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 council. Lots against the hill. The specific plan calls for a street to define the open space area on 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 as shown on the specific plan .map. 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, while respecting the overall guideline requiring development below the 320' elevation. 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, at the Orcutt Road intersection, between the two tributaries of the creek) shows a bike path entering the neighborhood park, meandering south for about 1,000 feet, then crossing the creek westerly to continue along the rear of existing lots. A portion of the path (the last 400 feet before crossing the creek) intrudes into the creek preservation area. �}�fly,ll�llll I'III�I�II City Of Say� UIS OBt�ISPO MEETING DATE: n41 I Illl�l�nll�llll l 1 w IU COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 7 The specific plan calls for different treatments for "creek preservation" and "creek improvement" areas, as the preservation areas 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 in creek preservation areas (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 26' 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 that was also appropriate for a sewer line crossing. - 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 i discovery of a potentially 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 targeted as a candidate species. Further, the creek preservation area standards were considered adequate to protect creek wildlife. 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. A second bike path, intersecting with the original and crossing the easterly branch of the creek to intersect with "A" Street, is of potentially greater concern. A turtle expert, visiting the site recently, was concerned that the path in the proposed location would interfere with turtle nesting areas. The applicant's representative is exploring other locations to cross this creek that would achieve the goal of directing foot and bike traffic away from the creek bed itself. 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 a 360' stretch having 10 foot setbacks, discussed below.) Except for this one area, where the path was inadvertently routed into the creek MEETING DATE: �III �I�I�III city of San 1 LUiS OUISpO ITEM NUMBER: Mra COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 8 preservation area, the creek preservation area standards are met and the creek improvement area standards are exceeded. 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 shovn in the specific plan. Unfortunately, Tract 1376 is built. The city has an open space easement over the rear of the first fourteen creekside lots, but this easement does not appear to 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. * 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 council 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 MEETING DATE: III city Of San LUIS OBISPO ITEM N MBER: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 9 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. Exhibits showing the alternatives will be available at the meeting. 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. (Staff has developed a tentative workscope to complete this study, involving a "team" overseeing the work of a consultant. Councilmembers may review this workscope in the Community Development Department if interested.) The Environmental Impact Report continues to be sufficient in staff's opinion because 1) the EIR identified the turtle's existence; 2) the EIR suggested mitigation measures to protect wildlife in the creeks; and 3) the recommended study will go farther than the EIR did in identifying impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. Change from private recreation area to public park. The specific plan EIR says that the Rodriguez adobe should be looked at more carefully at the time of subdivision, to determine its historical value. The specific plan does not address the adobe at all. The adobe has now been determined to be historically significant, and worthy of restoration. The applicant is proposing an offer of a one-acre park containing the adobe, in lieu of an approximately 1.8- acre private recreation area located approximately where the detention basin is shown on the tract map. Both the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Cultural Heritage Committee have looked at the proposal and support it. The Cultural Heritage Committee made several recommendations to maximize the quality of the environment surrounding the adobe. These recommendations are discussed further below. MEETING DATE: city of San IDIS OBISPO Nii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 10 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 4. 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 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. The specific plan says that the geological report shall "recommend measures to be incorporated into the design of hillside subdivisions and residential construction which will mitigate any slope stability or erosion problems." and that "the city's approval of housing developments or subdivisions on the lower slopes of Islay hill shall be contingent upon the succesful mitigation of any slope stability problems identified in the required geological report." (pp. 43-44) 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 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 "' o MEETING DATE: IY'I I`flllh �� san tuts osispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT REM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 11 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. 5. 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 thestreet layout may be necessary to achieve this goal. At the Planning Commission hearings, the issue of lots against the l 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 substantially- 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 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. 6. Railroad buffer. As noted above, the railroad buffer area differs from the standards in the specific plan, by being narrower and incorporating sound walls, but the specific plan allows for differences if acceptable to the council. Staff supports the differences, for the following reasons: 'l� V §11'11 � MEETING DATE: ��l ci o san-tins oB�s o COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 144.9-B Page 12 * The proposal includes a plan for smaller 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. They are equal in size to a large number of older lots now existing in R-1 zones. '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, in the absence of the walls, 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. If the council requires the original standards to be adhered to, that requirement would eliminate 26 of the small lots. 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. 7. 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. I€ 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 the swales. Staff does not see the public benefit of requiring swale retention, when views of these swales will likely ��ly,ll`IIIIII g �I` - MEETING GATE: W I� I��II�I I�uIII City of San Wi s OBI SPO ITEM NUMBER: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 13 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. S. 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 on the hill, 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. 9. 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 has not yet verified if the proposed capacity will be adequate, and is requiring a review by the original specific plan engineer. The basin has been enlarged in capacity by 40% since the Planning Commission reviewed this subdivision. The total volume is still lower than the requirement stated in the specific plan, but a preliminary review of the enlargement by the Public Works Department indicates it will probably be adequate. If the capacity of this basin is determined inadequate, then it will need to be enlarged. The result of that enlargement may be the removal of some of the residential lots. It should not affect the overall design of the subdivision significantly. Staff would prefer to have the Public Works 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 this impact is acceptable. 10. Rower lines. The specific plan calls for a linear park beneath the electrical transmission lines on the northeast side of Islay hill. /-!3 city of San- Luis OBISPO MEETING DATE: MIGA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 14 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 recommendation is based on recent reports on the possible danger of concentrated electro-magnetic fields near high-voltage transmission lines to humans. An additional condition requires a statement to be recorded on each lot near the power lines to inform lot buyers that they live near such an electromagnetic field. The developer has revised the 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. This revision reduced the total number of lots by six, from the number requested at the Planning Commission hearings. PARRS AND OPEN SPACE 11. Rodricuez park. The applicant proposes offering a one-acre site to the city as a park. The park would contain the Rodriguez adobe, restored in part by developer funds. When the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed the park proposal, it made the following recommendations: I * Prior to any grading or installation of subdivision improvements i in the area, a historic archaeologist should be hired to evaluate the Rodriguez Adobe site, and research and identify any historic archaeological resources in the area. * Prior to any grading or the installation of subdivision improvements, the developer should take "archival quality" photographs of the Rodriguez adobe (minus the chain link fence) and make them available to the city. * The design of the dwellings that front the local loop street bordering the park should be reviewed by the CHC to assure that they are not bulky two-story buidlings that overpower the historic building and adversely affect its historical character and setting. * The landscaping of the adobe should be in keeping with its historic character and importance. * The developer should provide alternative water supplies to use for the landscaping of the adobe grounds and park. Staff has incorporated these recommendations into the conditions. IVII��UuIIIIIII�I city Of San LUIS OBISPO MEETING DATE: WRIZO auU COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 15 12. Islay Hill open space and related carcel may, 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. The Planning Division is currently processing a parcel map application 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. The parcel map is scheduled to be heard at an administrative hearing prior to council action on Tract 1750. There are three issues raised by this parcel map as it relates to Tract 1750: 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, as shown on the specific plan? 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 in its consideration of Tract 1750, the council require the open space easement to include the entire hillside, including the area designated for equestrian use. The IIII�I�II�IIII ", T MEETING DATE: ITEM �im�►�iilleilll' ►�u�c+� c� o san tins oBispo RNMe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 16 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. 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 prefer to require dedication of the open space area in fee rather than as an easement. However, the specific plan does not include a requirement for such a dedication, and the property owners are opposed to it. SCHOOLS 13. Schools. Staff has heard from residents in the general area of the 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 recentpast 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 H6 City Of San LUIS OBISPO MEETING DATE: - aftme COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 17 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 effectively 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. No action is needed on the parti of the council. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND EXCEPTIONS 14. Medium density desicn 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 bedesignated 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 �IIIIII9II�I�IIII MEETING DATE: "��i��i�' I►► N►► cityof San Jlui s OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 18 designated R-2, is 513. If counted instead as single dwellings (R- 1) , the number is 465. It is this unit count, along with the increased density on the condominium and housing authority lots, 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. 15. 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. ) Working with the Authority, the developer has designed the project to be compatible with the condominiums, but to include no enclosed garages, and to include 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 23 condominium units to be restricted for sale to qualifying low- and moderate-income families. These units would be randomly �"l0 ��ill!IiR11116IIIIIIIg11101'I11I1 f pMEETING DATE: c�".7 o san tins oarsQ COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT rTEm NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 19 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. 16. Parking reduction request The plans show the Housing Authority lot containing the required number of parking spaces (47) . The apartments will be owned and operated by the HA in perpetuity, exclusively for low-income tenants. Because of this control, the HA would like a reduction in the number of spaces required. It has been their experience that fewer spaces are needed for this type of use than for typical apartments. In fact, the HA usually fences off portions of their parking lots for use as basketball courts or for similar activities. Therefore, the HA would like to reduce the required parking to 1.5i spaces per dwelling, for a total of _Q spaces. The land area converted from parking spaces can be added to the recreational area for the residents. The Architectural Review Commission, in reviewing plans for the apartment complex, granted schematic approval to the design and recommended approval of the requested parking reduction. Staff supports this recommendation. 17. Condominium standards The city has an ordinance setting property development standards (open space, storage, private yards, etc. ) for residential condominium development. 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 all 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 y��lllpl �UIII cMEETING DATE: t o san tuts oBtspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORTnT:M NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 1449-B Page 20 requirement may be met with minor changes in the plans. The project also includes a recreation building, pool, and whirlpool. Common recreational facilities such as these are not required by the condominium ordinance. The developer would like the council to consider the recreational facilities as providing a degree of "private recreation", to be considered along with the Rodriguez park as substituting for the private recreation area on the specific plan map. Staff does not have a position on this approach. The Architectural Review Commission reviewed the condominium proposal on April .16, 19.90 and on May 14, 1990. At the second meeting, that commission granted schematic approval with direction on ways to preserve views and maximize open space. 18. Yard setbacks. The applicants previously 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 79 and 90, are for homes on large but fairly shallow lots. The exceptions will afford easier access to the garages (all of which are setback at least 20 feet) , and will. provide more usable 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 those lots 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. The applicant would like the flexibility to apply for sideyard exceptions on a case-by-case basis, and therefore objects to the Planning Commission-recommended condition. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Concerns of other departments are contained in the discussion above or ,_, in the conditions. FISCAL IMPACT An approval of the map would include acceptance of ownership and nA �'oW c1T`�1J)I�(I�fIIIII�IIIIIII _ o san��uis osispo MEETING DATE: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT REM NUMBER: Tract 1750 PD 144.9-B Page 21 maintenance of the creek areas and the parks. The Parks Department estimates the cost of maintenance of these areas to be approximately $70, 000 per year. ALTERNATIVES The council may continue consideration. Direction should be given to staff and 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 1) Adopt a resolution approving the tentative map, with conditions. 2) Pass to print an ordinance approving the planned development rezoning. Attachments - 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 U requirements. 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. 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 preliminary plans approved on June 6, 1990. 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 353 dwellings, including 134 small lots, 88 two-bedroom condominium units, ill large single- family lots, and 20 two-and three-bedroom Housing Authority apartments, on the. lots as shown on the preliminary plan, 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. �-a3 C" 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: ' - I City Clerk APPROVED: i City Administrative Officer bi;t�j Att�orpey Community Deve opment Director i 1 RESOLUTION 140. (1990 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT 1750, CREATING 245 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, 88 CONDOMINIUMS, TWO PUBLIC PARRS, 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 1750, the Planning Commission's recommendation, the Architectural Review Commission's action, the Cultural Heritage Committee's recommendation, the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendations, 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. l-�S n Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 1750 Page 2 SECTION 2: The tentative map for Tract 1750 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Multiple final maps must be 'filed, in accordance with the phases shown on the approved tentative map. Time extensions pAy be granted by the city, up to the limits imposed by the Subdivision Map Act. 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 $100000 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. Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 1750 Page 3 Creek and detention basin requirements: 10. A minimum setback of 20 ' from the creek top of bank is required for rear property lines or any improvements, except for setbacks in a 320'-wide section shown on the Creek Treatment Concepts Plan, approved as part of the tentative map, which shall be a minimum of 101 . il. 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 Management 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 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, which the developer will be required to provide. The study period will continue for 24 months, to begin when the consultant is hired and begins work. 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, as shown on the Creek Treatment. Concepts plan, approved as part of this map, to minimize disturbance of the creek preservation area. 16. The creek banks adjacent to Tract 1376 .shall be revegetated Resolution no (1990 Series) U Tract 1750 Page 4 in accordance with the Creek Treatment Concepts Plan approved as part of the tentative map. Work shall be completed prior to acceptance by the city of maintenance of the area, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 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 basin shall be installed with the third phase of development shown on the tentative map. The detention basin may be fenced, at the developer's option, and must be owned and maintained by the tract homeowners' association. 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. 18. Creek preservation and improvement areas shall be dedicated to the city in fee, as specified in the Edna-Islay Specific Plan. Public Works requirements: 19. 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 within the roadway 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. 20. 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. 21. The water tank proposed in the easterly portion of the open space area, to supplement domestic water service, must be installed and operating prior to the issuance of building permits for phase 3 . 22. Water acreage fees and sewer lift station charges are required to be paid prior to recordation of the Final Map. �-as Resolution no (1990 Series) ' Tract 1750 Page 5 23. All lots must be served by individual water, sewer, and utilities. 24. 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. 25. The developer must dedicate vehicular access rights to the city, along all lots adjacent to Tank Farm Road and Orcutt Road, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 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 i-a q Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 1750 Page 6 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. 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 CDevelopment 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. 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 Director, 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 1- 3o Resolution no (1990 Series) . � Tract 1750 Page 7 satisfaction of the Community Development, Public Works, 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 and improvement rights, including maintenance by the city, 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 or earlier.' Prior to approval 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 trail construction, maintenance, or improvement of the Islay Hill open space, as needed. 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 pedestrian access to the Islay Hill open space shall be provided directly from all streets adjacent to the open space area, 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 of the power lines. 4.1. 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, at that time. i Water. 42 . The subdivider shall inform future lot buyers of the !-3/ Resolution no Tract 1750 (1990 Series) Page 8 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 recorded by a qualified archeologist, the cost of which shall be paid by the developer. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws. Homeowners' Association: 44. The subdivider shall establish covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings and facilities. These CC&R's shall be approved by the � . Community Development Director 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 park, 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 Director. Affordable housing: 45. Resalecontrols 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 planned developmentpreliminary plan. Remodelling and additions to these homes in the future shall be in accordance with the limitations in the zoning regulations. �-�32 C ; Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 1750 J Page 9 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. Except as shown on the tentative map, the maximum streetyard allowed on lots adjacent to the hillside open space is 201 . Streetyard exceptions, to reduce the amount of grading required for location of residences, 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 Director and the Architectural Review Commission. 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 Director-. Fees: 52. The subdivider shall pay any applicable tranportation impact fees adopted by the City Council, which are anticipated to be adopted on or about July, 1992. 53. The subdivider shall pay any applicable storm drainage fees adopted by the City council, which are anticipated to be adopted on or about July, 1992. Final maps: 55. The final maps shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review. and recommendation, prior to City Council approval. /-33 Resolution no (1990 Series) �-' Tract' 1750 Page 10 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: City dministra ve Offi r City Attorney" /-3JI Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 1750 Page 1 ALb Community Devel(fp p ent Director JL1:res\tr1750.wp /35 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. denied. SECTION 2. The tentative map for Tract 1750 is hereby 1-310 1 Resolution no (1990 Series) Tract 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: City Administr tive Offi r p ' t neyl ` L /Awe,. Commu ity Developt Director jzl.:res\trl750no.wp �_ CTHE 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 eidsting.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. Housing 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 following 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 area in phases 1,.-2, and 3. 7 1 1-30 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. w 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 siteis 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 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 ren+a��* g housing type will be a 117 lot R-1-PD single family development on the lower slopes of Islay Hill. These will be large, natural terrain hillside lots 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 1-39 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 mfi irmzed on the more sensitive.hillside areas. The proposed development has a total of only 472 dwelling*units*providing for a broad spectrin of housing needs. Grading 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 lou and condommmms 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 minimising 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 R-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 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 area 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 aces 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 area designated by the specific plan. l 3 �-Ifo 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 submir;aL 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 eidisting 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 sell 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 Mitization 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 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. " basin A phasing plan is included in the application which designates phase areas. These area 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 Lots1990-1991 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 Bile 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. r 5 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 are to be used for earthwork balancing. Generally, this will occur according to the following schedule; A PHASE ADDITIONAL 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.trade 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 _ =i.INoise Impact Analysis Page 10 Tract No. 1150 July 21, 1989 Lots Barrier Description and Height 140 15, 239 24 None - Edge of road and/or slope to tracks provides required shielding 46, 479559 569 629 79 Wall at Edge of Lot - Top 6.5' above. 80; 90., 110, 111 8 134 adjacent side or rear- yard elevation 135 through 143 and 169 Berm Between 'G" Court and Railroad - Top Elev 226 across from Lot 169 and rise to Elev 246 across from Lot 135 220 and 246 through 251 Wall at Edge of Lot - Top 6' above adjacent, yard 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 160' south of north P.L. Table 3 Required Noise Control Barriers Indoor Noise: Normal residential construction with closed windows typically produces approximately 20 d6 of outdoor-to-indoor noise reduction, therefore, only those areas with outdoor noise. exposures higher than Ldn 65 would require special mitigation measures beyond closed windows. and mechanical ventilation, in order to conform with the L'dn 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 , La+ 65 and 69. WALKER. CELANO & ASSOCIATES 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. Standards01 " = Interior and exterior noise must be reduced to acceptable levels as defined by the 1915 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. 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. . f IThe `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. 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 ;.:f. 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: '• 134 a�� - It provides facilities or amenities suited to a particular occupancy group (such is the elderly or families with children). I - It transfers allowable development within a site from .areas of greater environmental sensitivity or hazard to areas of less sensitivity or hazard. I - It provides a greater range of housing types and costs than would be possible with development of uniform dwellings throughout the project site or neighborhood. I - Features of the particular design achieve the intent of conventional standards (privacy, usable open space, adequate parking, t compatibility- with neighborhood character, and so on) as well -as or , I 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 Housin ._Areas - The City Council may approve a density onus o up to 25 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. 17 /� `/ / growth management The development sequence of the Edna-Islay neighborhood has been divided into nine phases. Montht, 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 ollowingstandards 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 April 1985 4 June 1986 5 September 1987 6 April 1989 7rAp i1 1990 8 April 1991 9 September 1992 - phasing must proceed sequentially as shown in figures 32 and 33; and - at least SOX 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",Zoning Consistency section. page I1) immediately upon adoption of".th3s: /� 1 m N N I Npa I Yr �11 ` N W 03 0 O N - s = N . z f ON ..W 6LU . Q N ~ Eccy}a¢ Q 0 �__ C S z Q a � m_ < W ~~ _N V W Z �^ LU N_ t O Z/Z W l LU 6 ` V W F W 4w� _ z i IV lu 12 �, - W - IL cl a sh w N in (/)Z t= �s aO Z Ws y ZJ= Q �g w _s CA o ¢a= i Q Ota a cm Elm w _�.�. Z Z _l Q Z Oe . zW F O mj arw Ogg LM Z �O f" — O *Mae/ vm s � � • . o a. t f HJ MG � J Q � Z �; h � • O - j��9 Wto eo ` � c .0, � s� Lt's l � S s6 w mQ Z iQdmc o o�i2 all iI gL-� 5 `0 2 _~ 8 ti 3 mw Lu ca E9m� ��LD < .. w0 ~ OiZ W � � 'ysma =4Sm8 W �°��+`c '-'�n Z yxj LO W U q��o � �= '� °s V .� �o�� Wok W o as J QI O Qg1 y0 c2 gVEl 021 I Q ZcWem88 � Q �! � W W z r 1 I �0 - 44 1 i I 1 . 1 t` s L74i II /�V O T/ 11 1 'SI 1, 1.(• t• 'i !// /r,� /� � •I'll 1 ', /\ 1 � � ' 'r' . . �� • 1 1111 1 �• �p ,C \ ., ��\`. +.,` `` '��� , 1 +` ,'` �l tea. \. •1~�'-\ `��-+ Sib �a• \ App PO _`. Ar _ �0 ��i�.�.•Q::i:[{icy}"{.-��aL•��'�y.:��:!{��i, 1a✓ 1, � ^iD . • I r rJbi`' fib" � �f:�� • �� V r•= IS MAR IS 16 IN 41V • 'ice ` lac .tea, . � ern• •' � � ter• �-. ��� � - ►�`V1• 2'. � r c y iJ . - . . .. f �- •���,I• �, - • • h .a �e'' _ A Afo This is a summary of provisions governing uses allowed in the conservation/open space WOO zone. Consult the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations for additional information. Date Revised: May 1984 w 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, columbariums * Mineral extraction 53-84' • - �iil�� lel��fl���ii►�illlllll_lln,ia_IIIlillll II ofWEETING -- AGENDA �^yEM_JATE � # city sen / 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 9340f1. ! nes acMn b} Lead 'sr;con t' j Respond by: L�li/Council l(,� q May 22, 1990 ty Atty. erk-o TO: City Council Members @, 7- 7—. VIA: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Qo ` FROM: Terry Sanville, Principal Planner tS. 1 SUBJECT: Informational Background Report on Development and Subdivisions in the Edna-Islay Area. The Situation In June, 1990, the City Council will consider a Master Tentative Tract Map and Planned Development proposal for the Islay Area--the partially-developed area east of the railroad tracks, and south of Tank Farm Road. The proposed subdivision and planned development is one of the last steps taken by the property owners and the city to convert the Edna- Islay area from rural grazing land into the city's newest residential neighborhood with a total of over 1,000 households. The following actions taken by the property owners and the city resulted in the current situation. Annexing and Zoning The Edna-Islay Area (1960) The Edna-Islay area was annexed to the City in 1960. This action was taken prior to the creation of the Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCo) and the city's adoption of its first general plan. The property was initially zoned "Unclassified" (U). At that time, any development proposed within a U zone required the approval of a use permit by the Planning Commission. Adopting a New General Plan and Requiring a Specific Plan (1977) Between 1974 and 1977 the city was working on rewriting its General Plan Land Use Element. Part of the debate involved determining the appropriate land use designation for the Edna-Islay Area. The staff had recommended that the area should be shown as an "interim" agricultural area and be considered as a holding zone. Staff noted that the area was remote from city services and separated from existing neighborhoods by substantial county territory. Staff suggested that the intervening county territory should be developed before the Edna-Islay Area. The City Council decided that the Edna-Islay area be allowed to develop. The Land Use Element adopted on January 25, 1977 designates the Edna-Islay area as a "low-density" housing area with the flanks of Islay Hill designated as permanent open space beyond the urban reserve. R E C;E'C V E MAY 3 u i9 io CITY COM' SAIN LIS OEISr0, CA Page 2 — Edna-Islay History The text of the 1977 Land Use Element includes the following policy: "Specific Plans should be required for the Edna/Islay Hill residential expansion area before allowing developments to proceed." (Paragraph C.1 (c), page 11). A specific plan is a document that bridges the gap between generalized land use policies designations and policies in the land use element and the precise design of subdivisions. A specific plan should present the character and arrangement of land uses, the location of streets, open spaces, recreation areas, utilities and other public improvements. In requiring a specific plan for the Edna-Islay area, the City Council was also concerned about the rate and phasing of development and its relationship to the availability of water supply.. Preparing the Edna-Islay Specific Plan (1977-1979) When the general plan was adopted in 1977, the land west of the railroad (the Edna Area) was owned by Cuesta Valley Properties and the land east of the railroad (the Islay Area) was owned by a group of people represented by Dr. John DeVincenco. Each of the property owner groups were represented by their own consultant — Merriam, Deasy and Whisenant (MDW) represented Cuesta Valley Properties and Richmond, Rossi, and Montgomery Associates (RRM) represented Dr. DeVincenzo et al. MDW took the lead in drafting the specific plan for the Edna-Islay area. While a number of draft reports were prepared over a three year period, the report that was eventually distributed to the Planning Commission for consideration was written by the City Planning staff. A comprehensive Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the City Council noting significant impacts on transportation, circulation, and community services and utilities and suggesting mitigation strategies. Adopting the Specific Plan (1982) The public review process for the Edna-Islay Specific Plan was exhaustive. Between April 1980 and March 1981 the Planning Commission held numerous hearings and study sessions, responded to 28 major issues identified by staff and the public, and forwarded recommendations to the City Council. Between July 1981 and January 1982 the City Council held numerous meetings to review the Planning Commission's recommendations and on February 8, 1982 adopted the Edna- Islay Specific Plan. Some of the key issues raised as part of the public hearing process included: Page 3 — Edna-Islay History Flood Control Strategies Creek Preservation Hillside Development Infrastructure Improvements Fire Protection Requirement Phasing of Development Assisted Housing Programs Phasing was a key part of the specific plan. It was envisioned that the entire area would be developed in nine phases, over a period not less than eleven years at a maximum average annual growth rate of 94 units per year. Implementing the Edna-Islay Specific Plan (1982 - present) Since 1982, the owners of the Edna Area have submitted six subdivision maps (including three condominium subdivisions) consistent with the Specific Plan, constructed about 400 dwellings, and have almost completed development of their land west of the railroad. Prior to development of the Islay Area, Pacifica Corporation purchased the property, constructed the railroad underpass at Tank Farm Road. A tentative tract map for the first phase of development in the Islay Area was approved in 1987 and 131 homes are being constructed. The proposed "Master"Tentative Map details how the remainder of their land would be subdivided and developed in six phases with a total of 341 units. According to the phasing schedule on page 84 of the specific plan, building permits for Phase 7 of the plan could be issued by April 1990. While development in the Edna Area has proceeded as allowed by the specific plan, development in the Islay Area has happened at a slower pace. The adopted specific plan includes provisions that recognize that when subdivisions within the planning area are submitted, is likely that some changes to the specific plan will be requested. Provisions on page 81 and 82 describe what constitutes a"minor" change versus a "major" change to the specific plan and authorizes the Community Development Director to make these determinations.. Throughout the subdivision of the Edna-Islay Area the director has approved minor changes — including phasing changes in both the Edna and Islay areas. The city staff is available to answer any questions that the City Council might have concerning the history of the Edna-Islay planning efforts. Testl/ts JUN NJ C-- r,/ 44 o:1 Tot, Cou nc-( C�z F-Ro N\ -1-0 h C 3` s\J L) T RCE o--T I &k i1i C-� c I C Hc) t-LA NZ., t INI pc>N 14a L u r- s . Yi Wesier Y-\ I A-L A�� qAftNe- P\f,>--T I C'\-)L (a R L TaC)V, 17, Tf\- V\ I c 1 5; C) C-)e r)-j- FFc, i On 0 ec.\ t yvl�5 +T) Cc, I-r-If C}- j .V-V C T(f JUI'�-495-1'�7U 15�c� rh'�11•I �r:� cri i carr,I�c _ _ _ . -.. V o,tevr„�Rr' The University of Southwestern Louisiana �`�• Lafayette, Uuuiana 70504-2431 College of Sciamee Depat'tn"of Biolvo Past-It`"brand fax transmittal memo 7671 #of pages ► P.O.Box 42431 /1/ -%L/ Iuj -5'�-ip to (318)231.6748 . ok Ms. Jhdem LarOwer Co. 7 �. L' o "A4 1 lilSt14• CIA pt. oex .7 L lU sift Letl /Irstaa a■ Sttw Fri/ Ibtpf•e to ors0l OS t7 fN4 14 )es. PICO.. X defe rsv re// ereore IAL Aawef- herd!/sw /er,ref oZ sArf lesser flus t Z dot Cerrr.Nrj tAvolved /. a Aft/df ftSc#reA Prejda r* t rafA.rrt.aefe t,t� s, f 0f0 Aef Amare accal.t H a �yPatrrrfv of dome^( Pr'wessir•, tri am wrrf/,:J da '041•/re/r te.ae 9rwrrs/ conc 'J" jr ,� Aavc 4vrf4 erw1'rS1 re'10, P,Pfrry/a♦/y e1d 'Act +fir#' errftrtr 700ctr1 o/ of-JAM/SIN/ s►/!A AMA144 X 00% feu//iap: Ond /ere sonic rerearwA u4perre,te. , SfprerFe3N�, T^Ple set t(. WeJfa+w Ae.ttJ jLr/e/e �4/ewM wr w.a r !(r C./t Firers Red- /es9rd Fis, �.LC.>t ..aL� =� � r dwI fAr ewe— tf^,iP•.t 6avh+" S�� ! ewrw• ♦. �Ia� 6Rell, . l �•r/d a/Ja /i#T .ra a.ddKXr /iir w r / N�f� M dent/ / eh fliede : tr pa�ertftt►/ r+�//acL s>' Itce R de►j of Z'd +y �werA° /jei Q , TO d6Vrwr ;PAc evesfere, /pond ,rowk thrrerN04Cr- WPr er a j ij CN,4lti4+l@r4F4r �wdr�d/a �wV a'J "e rnt 7hfrs Rrii arlef/xt lerw,cre nrdita/iwj v44af 4•litfrx ttJ lr ltra,c/ aeraterst a `eve A.flfSefr►J Ac. 7/ptGJCI A64A (;A eftyV /($I-ad tS 0' tjrt,4/W("e Of ve/tlest At:,g*L44 . *My rcJtar'e'A /wrlees/trff�.f rw //< rhgjeref3 of rtte•P*Vae Peal/nFionJ file! TfJtrNrs Mve dl /s rew rarpvw/u �.r:lry /, rlrtt rc,lvetd, sr trc /H a r/•/e e>! decY/n4 , rAeri Ort 1 Nu,,pb r.e pre6ab/r eA*Vet ,Car rA4 v;A'&4+.,., rice *asst r*�erle.kj4 s,[ e•A14 is Aerfr/,+f srAe nfeJAd/e'da. tar( tt&tt&:V Qt fAt. 4.144rr /■ea/ecd .w 14C 4/494/IKc; of ,0F4er3'4. oovjfl&Asiv / is en //4e1� felts rrrswy Of t &vL nrtsy r+' f r4 I•x^t�idfrG c�serfa ./ �r,r.4afn.%4wt( 77te 0%f..nr4.n ./in q erf a C fA♦ ee,.f.�/ Cea/1e /i i(r.l�Gerw, t rr VAah / r /r.•ArsKJ' o ck_ /C `L. JhJ& wM� •'w, w a a ad d. 'r/- - s 9 , �7 Svrh, /e r,frrvt/•sem q a�� Pro!-cedte�.► ♦f !•tele dp.�e, /a /,'.x.r /t e/ /portwr evn f i.•AysrtRearr rte w+e/s<wia •f• /etlf 0"1L O^.. s+tCti dre vra`/t /peter/a/vas •/ L!// )�eeies, Y9 { F•-e9 lAe�er�a �.r • C►/ � 1 /CL�F wur•1,1trwdw Mo... ` r♦ ,• �� aM /r11/EI^v rAa/ 104 ,Wafrtt /fete Ismer cv/trrP*} d tAr•dv94a.74 FA,-#%A'ar,i. ter( 14'r rs.t9t , ww^f fAtf tA. e.w hrwt�wrn9 vra4/. paew Lf.a.,t /A^i •I.3y ert �a.nd �p,..aari/S 6r t*r Genfr.l tears. 7-ncywP -s,•,-r�crf '•r{cr ln^.� Aaa tt 1t, jeu/(dn1 �. h„. .I ' �•t�e w/en/+ .SAC Cs/��ar.7/d Cisf/s ■,wt ^t�rJie<..t fk^vr.Ae,rw,s Like OA. Fre4 ask +w q 06/05/90 16:52 8 805 427 3308 PIEDRA#RiaCRS 02 JLIH-05-1990 15:24 FP,4M THE E1TfEPPRISE TO 1805?_73ZOF P.E= V �a{e rsw/r-r/ GRs�. .:.._/ J@oet/�s I! t.ol rvr><rrait.� 'dL r Y,* /al.PLj wtoLA .474AGr- mrme sea.s Ay1 '. tAll AA rte arc re /.k.•e/y e ! A IACP&- de- 11"o .rtMrf'Fw^� auwfar' hslt+4uF AwJ /A tAa erG eM(e frrt/t Tsar rev/tr/ -64 4 /t4r-a,Irer. ea le .s to �•A..� /+t it l.lr A•blllaf (�) , /��aJoal wtseeA tare/rr r.../ .• or ester Ohl serwrw/Ira.rfr / Itlre Aker .d dress t+�tA d•st ><k•/t ,PC&,el (area at fat I}rirrr at /s/euJ f(i !) r�awFtF/ fa Strrer4ty rw�ae>A �'�./af..wf 9/ frit evPT1 ILLF' it TSG r / Ake �Otw�t ifiset AjIep4LA p /stttfttty Al Arar,yAf t )40tIArrrw>tr:w MAI be fete e-e•sr �1c . swM/ .4 + e/reiRev/ae('e f /SOfet to • 7rty /er, 0r <6oaAeef to wa� IvAt t q�re.h of /�Ae s/veet.r bio logy tad s�eee�r�s •r A !At eO .raarcr Apt t�t/i�a psrfi&V14^P007e.///77+��1-Y4 )IA relrCAI . (ie{er>evn• E./ r yt �et' a nn. 6or 47t rraYor.s, �►++ P bore° { tche attiae et0/6� y ' 0>/ >•�CSe �d4ree Vetfe't ►a^Atn !rr<><�i� er rA khe�,w /w r6prrr f0 ♦fsftr f�ettt�to eeipeript Area art �easr/a +/Aow J/ert eriast%letee 1t99 Ii fey, awe! tree vvfqirppjf tf/cs) /nitr. pate/altoh rrave..eA�t f�alY iJ IA/.4eQw'1r Ye eaft•aaewa�w p•ODe.la�lawt xre% >Rka� core,(rt/ Gh Vto r#e yiren f� tka �ae-f/e✓Ittf o/ mdLtk r )4,ey sI lke. 9tlrer. l t�:aFs eet fke_ ee:/ef tto/o'j/ I ate yr�/y ds ttoit iseey, !«obit{ °`ort a �tear¢rtu/i t^ rasa fp`�.,.aQe. br`rwt! 9t/term/r�r.tt�/:.t Y/�af u�r e� tCosltel.�alr/e vet y�q �/e�►�tot f �or- Rtr�a�0epow/• I�[+.yeeltr/ tAr's twllir.Nar<tea eM�M �a a bt+lw.o/ u+l� lD��fC�t«1/ �Iwt a at,-d ,-(e/yt As wI k Ohl t/N.f/qr "'fear" , taw/eew►/ ANd /t/he/ed &q ve%e....-/ tvik torvfzcl.tor% oA t4e fle-savretCf) A �artraewn-1 4•nteeltrwf.eK Ilely.hdt papas ttie tYtttlerpsG OA qh `4c-tu"t d►silt 6^$4L de >r r.h r/a"L eeCtre fti.t o e..r1 tvst'tt+4/e Jr1Mf'ta..s +t• tike �ro4/a...d` IAre(re.1• Oetriteh - A,akrKt wt Ifert ak,c i-7Ar~vIfew wd/ 114en /cart ;o QI>`(er In reo*illlelPw'¢abrt��eG>Zloe. �r Aft ~ rateorcet /eaeAe.i9 vfi I�1 ereoe�rsl a%t«ft7al.iw er .tw9r�otf,tire.. , enel�i/ a�+eclve. a,.•t � 1�.pol-/}ea alVeyl-sv/e urlrrea #e ct/t,.¢tth ereA/eef 6j/ /na htuak `tP/1CI AIf f til foie -174-0 00/4t .ri ttv t , i'; rfalttiw AAS o//tN peen fj(t CA se /w &Aker A,cAj - eKol 40ef waf Terre t%e tniero.l1-s of :i� •/ 04e psr)4e5 Mrolved- f#a •(tos(OP't's)t /'t reg. lalerel s ent�as t Or YAt r•ese✓retCs) . fuse,/ r en wx tlArrrrWfenf t✓t✓vi Ayer. G,wtj Lt.�rfell enef a 6rr'a� rerte.v OA rroPet+d Arb,rs et 7r/a�r //r// r(wa/s�KeN/, Z awe 9r.-w/ly conetrred ?4tlaf thri �er,trGt/!ar �yPe 0f Y'Aguzeo;% JA V" 01,fVdaoo, Xg ,Ptrfaeftior, of tic wa7't$rS"AIL tts waf/ .s tt.at f/Ae /2r^F aid P.rr/61, TSC, Popo/a,/eeKr /., t/hts v,.aa tr •� ' /Y.p u / I'f/ �9 E.A 4/r-[0-j et req fn Cr 1 l to t'e,.oi444,;fk tfj^ �t e646ohed he-ArcK s/•ve/°nese.../ /awj 4rv. Etna /i2en� e� ry✓tof res tJ 11r5►r6r4 7Xti tt.. Qw/ be * ""111pf y , t WAr4,{� tYeexta� rAc e(rt,nemics /. r/wfraws of, )Aae T/->acrtt w•rt+e0 rn fArS are%. TArse S/yp(rtf , dor VO 1'4C pie '1�44L. PAL4M 0-P'* yk a er'anrtw.s tn>.elrarjt Se►wc irMt.ie cee.&leic . r9n.en' etA+ trrtt. p / .�veJ(+bHS (4e ft,. tNA7- lay•>'aetrn) •i:O`J HM; 805 927 3308 • e6iesi98 16:, 5434295 6 3 JuIJ-G�-150 15�c_ FkGl9 THE ENTERRF,I;E a ees 9 r 33ee PIE�R11 gS e�aNcas 03 TO if��c=7i_��Jr' G.D1 C 'L/ tt Olt T/tt wwd •..ylt.w 'Pro 144 ,00Jcwr/0A,1a ? U 44&/ /1f1-CEMI*.'. of }dc v4sm.•/.t /w !'Q.c �ePo/i/ro,c �r� ra�I�s1. wl,af 01er1`shf•a Of tAti ereaya/a r" efi�c/ w.�lv�t .�' /� ,ys O.44tV4/fy �r•etrreet ? y No.Ir e� tt4e arr�Ortl�ph r/fa!=�� s I� wAar,e Fk arf.ra.,�er.j�,;� W� fjtrev�f y. o f �/�a/�sui If.r's ea.d t.a.// •N ton a/J arc u�Aaf wtr 1'�A� /Geew$ thek lt•f ftoil) .f A.t�se•h¢�e�./ar�re.�J � lottaf ok r( 1/tr e . refry s0e 'r >K C fytt C�Ore4{arrc,4es •� OVtrt�twtL�rt r/�•�r /w /q//e! !"A<se ,eev e , I; Iefertntti,�/ tf tra,w41Ie..ee e / • vio 4/r ! S JVMce O/`,le.-s n .r„et o{ � A, � c,r( ,► � 1 rtr/w. f�:s J�ecies •w t�lrS vrfk Mo/a40F4 +�ae�poli f,s, n�erNw<ty to /Ae �t+l0 -t arfA,h at JlVew area Bare A#ir4e;Ce/ty beer, /w!�/ueKcsd ,6 tit. 10& 91'144111i4 •-/ sdt h641a lreas. dl 9�arsd r u rrrd Row wilt 'fits oNer- 017 Jal,r.rcer. dw.lo�,y,K� �,,�e,r/!0!/y i4Feef 4A Ii r.�t,efsran 7 ta►elly/ � IS t / ydr ybt,,.f It..L'srw d At s.. fAiid ta.t a w Qa Aa Ar-A,4 tit r.,/ ¢h, 49 h Fvt-Ai�&Aa/ �!/wtlAtM '� ! A �Ii &e / RS ve// dw f; �a �n/farre tw ?t�rj a►ei Grel.�/ dadsd u�• de /.of aw.L �1l jv h,ty ti( !t'r•/,s s WAri parr(wf.or., ! .ct; ae/I ss >�•sr of f4 ofuer J ' ua `Jw6a iy 7l'0 C►wslc,ct f'Ai,� tvott aXtft4 R t deeS fytc �a►t• � T>lle B�'t'1l,,T3, alo t+sf enee/esr tt eh fde es)0cwf,w/ 4r t/,T rettrejf >�a.f �ev uws,e(ar these, t&wtlMg^IL-f gL" tt�{bra�e�n� •^ fit_ Aef;Iaw �e hr 0-*4.04 eN He AeAprr wt /c/ k•tw /t.idiw9 Ole we ley?Irt raa/T. .� a,.v tol tyc eN t//iw� Hill i tt of ��f� � J rt. d,stuss � f� 9 rtp4t Y �9Jt''� , f/It1 O t Jip., /fir• St'�,ia �. � 16Y&VC GA�fN/eRCG. /�ww� aw 46- y•vr f/xtif Ow� t �S�Iewtl., •Dsr` C. Aolf" �li11e 5. r,.::rci! 1-lembers I believe misleading and inaccurate information has been offered by tile applicant on the Open Space portion of Islay Hill. Before the council takes action un the tentative tract map for Tract 1750, it must take action to establish correct factual character of this open space. I think there should be genuine concern that the adjacent property owner, Northwinds NV, is seeking control of the property in order to 4 achieve a bargaining position to permit development of its property. In summary, at the final planning commission hearing. Pacifica withdrew its offer of dedication of 75 acres in fee. A substitute tract map has been submitted by the adjacent property owner. The withdrawal of Pacifica's offer of dedication was attributed to a contractual obligation to a previous owner. This previous owner was described by Pacifica's representative at the March 28 Planning Commission hearing as Dr. John Devincenzo. The claim of a contractual obligation is explicitly contradicted by my review of the deeds and other documents available at the county Recorder's office, The tentative parcel map ISLO 89-219► submitted by Northwinds NV withdraws 9,8 acres from the proposed open space easement. Oniv5R Father than 75 acres are proposed for open space. I My review of deeds and related documents can be outlined as follows. Dr. john Devincenzo sold the Islay property to Pacific Ventures on Oct 3, 1984. The selling price was $2.453 million. (Deed recorded in book 2540, In August 1986, the property was sold to Pacifica Corp, for exactly 5 million dollars Robin Rossi is described as the seller, having succeeded to sole beneficial interest" in Pacific Ventures. C ECTIVE 1;2-b C� A . JUN b CITY CLERK SAN -UIS OBISPO,CA O The 190 deed also has an attached agreement carefully describing the terms of sale . Among these items are paragraph '.?. 3.3 and 3A, In paragraph 2.7, Rossi, the beneficiary agrees to obtain appropriate releases so that any precedent liens on the deed shall be released without cost or delay. This means Rossi agrees to obtain clear title from John Devincenzo. In paragraphs 3.3 and 3.4, titled Co-operation and Joinder, Rossi agrees to release all claims to title any and all areas of theproperty, wherever located either to be conveyed to any homeowners association or to dedicated to the public pursuant to conditions required by any governmental agency in connection with the approval of any final subdivision or development of the Property." Furthermore Rossi authorizes Pacifica to enter into "any grant of easements, dedications, covenants over, in, or about any portion of the property that are reasonably necessary to the development of the property." I believe the conditions of this deed explicitly contradict the claims made by Pacifica and its representatives that a contractual obligation which prevents dedication of the Islay Hill open space to the city in fee. The dedication of the open space parcel in fee was identified by the staff report as "normally, in cases where public use is encouraged, it is best for the city to own the property.- I note that the city is undertaking responsibility to build and maintain any trails on the property. I question the propriety of the city improving and maintaining private property. I am concerned that the Planning Commission, city staff, and council members were offered unverified and factually incorrect information regarding contractual obligations on the open space parcel by Pacifica. Sincerely a 4 John Chesnut 314 Higuera San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Phone 544-6?23 C cc: Judith Lautner, Arnold Jonas, Jeff Jorgenson, Dave Eddy tT-T i Enclosure: schematic outline of deed transfers Islay Hill property. e. necomeo NO Rro, -CO RY TICOR TTTLE INaURANCE COMPANY OF CALIPORNIA ' - p RECORDING REQUESTED BY +. •+►, I t,1 ESCROW SERVICC3 OF Tit r) O(X_ No. 529Jfi ( T. CENTRAL COAST Of:II-,IAI, ni:c( IIUS 412 Hiquera Street SAN I IIIC OIIISPO C0 CA San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 AUG 2 2 1998 +wo mMtw wf comott)w+.roFnANCIS M.DDONEY DOC NO. GUIIC1 DS County Clark-Recurtlor OFFICIAL C ISP O Co..r A r 1 SAN LUIS 0819 PO O.CA ,..-. PETER C. MILLER, ESQ. SEP 2 4 19M8 MILLER 6 WALTER FRANCIS M.GOONEY Oft 412 Itiquera Street CCunty clerk-Record! y.. LSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 J TIME 8.00AM SPACE ADOVE THIS LINE Fort nECOnDEIQ S USE CA'w ww-,A- LONG FORM ALL-INCLUSIVE PURCHASE MONEY DEED Of TRUST AND ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS •n:nwC.n NI J This All-Inclusive Purchase Mower peed EdTru�( maJc Ihi...l4th_ day nf. At"<O°_t _ Iv g� hetwern_THE_PACIFICA CORPORATION, a _CtaliEornia eor�ozatIon Mein called nus1Oa,who.e3dme,,;. 200. N.__Westlake .Blvd, Westlake vi110_ge CA_91362, TICOR TITLE. INSI;RA'XCE. (' )NIPANY OF (•AI.IFORNIA, u cm.tw.r.A w.n, hemm cmirJ ul .n,. ar.1 PACIFIC VENTURES, a joint venture _ _-- -.. herein called aENF FKIARY, �Yl pricipenyi That Thlator tititiv KAntt GRAMS,TlAN3FEl3 AND A33N:N3 TO 1RU3711 IN TRIAL,WITH fOw ER Of 4LI. thatplopMyin .—San Luis-.Obispo.__ . .—. -._.C1lunty.CaliflNnlade.cnbedn: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" THIS Dt1-D OF TRUST i5 RtLu=tD N ATTPIC)( Tilt LCG+il. DLSL:KIPTIUi. TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA. JJ Td:afHF.R Will Nle RM\.i.we\and profit\Ihennf,q wit I. 11OIs1\f R.10 the nFM.plmtr Ad auduw,l\ htRmahel 111,M to bad cunlenEd upon Senencisr)TO ailed and apply,bah lent\,nww\and pmol.. C For the Purpose of SecurinR: I. perhw,nMlte of each gl.emrm ef llwdlw hnen.comaned .• ►a.aem,d Ile uwknedm..e.drmed 1.m Mina Alt w iwuvw penkawr mue\ plaei.wey mine of even Awe IN h.ad Mn"Im,,sal,m Tow..)nlrmr.m Ane pm.Irq.l win of 35 r 000.. Q4 q �0L d-0 an�Unz m0 ed I.mwedanerw,wywm,ka Trustor's obit a io s yyn €r. ara4rap CC Ultket Inoblitat greenteaEntt dated Aril 9a 19 bgtween Trustor and Bents c� ry. FIVE_HI LLI_ON_DO_L_ d[4of slaw.N.twllr 1 an All.mhww flown a maw.P..n..wy ear. de nnpww pnmgd M,Oaa of CL Ikmw.11_5a000.a000 _.__.lime-mon-I.hmh m.h.k..ahm'wh Mmrm IN uelNd h.I.i[r a IN h.lwm•y -- 1(` twArm+ m,a.e.nnwalFmdpnmlp.I. .fTwn million FauiHundred-rilCY_i.11.r.M' T11Qu8(!nd Five. Hundred _ .._MIM. rt 2.4531�Q0_00____y „IaK,d _JOh21.�.�D.CVirtCtnEo_aIISLR9bq�\q—DeVincenzo-._—._ —— _ — — - -- - - - — - - —-- — M►awe. N'MM1 by a and d im,4 r nhw October 3, _ to. 84.a.no oMm No 528 n2 .- _.u R,nL 26 40_.►qe 92_tx lw line ur_S&u_LUiH_Obispo cmw+y.E•r.rmm..Md 'Uhl Ap.amewy eormmr malwat lw,mnpal wmd�_—.--.— _ —_._ www d M.drrd d Irw.ma+And _. _. .._.Io. . .M Daumem V. ._... .. _____._ •w R.wi __ P,re Of An.?Rnmd.d I174 rlvml.uw)Nlae,.eC-TTJ h,,uch,tead.M rm.t.re helna.hn t alted the-.Kit 1.•M Nm,.-I Ta I mart the Steortty of This Deed of Truo.T}mtor AKim: t 11 T let?Yid prmgwen m loW tordmloa and rt?wr.m M M."Of drmW.,h am Nnhhnr dernm.M nurpr<m m.wwe pn•w,r,1,ad m iwd..d abolt rmM[nnnm an)Ir14Nnr.hwh ma)N t0lnlm[1ad,darn.W m 6t a nyld IIItrMw W b pay.M.Jae.II.I..w.Iw I.Ip pM,wmN ab mrn+aw fr,w,led de.efor,inn nmmdy.,M w1 h..anMM1,eA1 Pr+4td7 a.equm.l Mmy.INrw.mw M Ingmw..w+w.w.N m.tr Mrnw.wa.In cmmnn w Rnn1 wart db Am ,int 1n[wmww...Inh m pl.wm my.C1.p.m,aid pnRlrrt\m vW M.d I...w Nm.Mt.imvw.kmhn,hm+trt,p.vnr a w h,all miler aDa e4k frram the Ckxwwr m amt d mad propaq mer K RraaIJJ)nn'f•+rl.01e.Fla,rK emmmnma:wn hamaan Imin t.cladm.l Ae iar.etd t)1 T pre..'e,mamaM nN drll.er m 1knAklry nr,erdah.m.nA mJkww.ml.chwf mwranae.wm.Tana\rami+ww kw.p.,.W M a—•f:,.ry ' The al,anoa tQ11m: onha any M m Mim monlobf ode)may he AWwd M 11Mefln h.poi,r,)nAlffwlnn,mKw1l.1 herelw and u,aeh e,dn m 9oenno,mq dewtlmw.m w m.p„g1 d aemeMry 11me l.Mka.,nlYw...tMltCaad maw)pem mere"N lekMad w To.v Awh,Mlwmlm Or wls 4"moa two w wniw aur Alvah w hake of drfmh Hammier Or r.d4m ban ao dwe pa b o,m m,wk maw, TN permiow.Awad Are I'C p de ruluw tlrnmtr.d Illr panto n Nkm,rl fpm 1 y)Th.pper m aid dAemd ry al kw m prntwAM Imm,' ,1 m aRwi the`nWky h- I,de nlhM Or pawn,d Rrwfk,.n w 11o.r..and a F• sa too rd eapaw.ea,imkdlml eMf of w:dawaa Of Mk aid main.*1 he,m AT Ta,O 141..M.m army back Aare M A M d M waw1b Ilr.mahlMy A""may sypew,ami I.my wk hroweM M MnMclry m to w dont mi.Dead (4r T Fay r it"tem Aan helm Arhngeekcy.R amt.M4 rv..Wat.wf t -1'Md prupeny,kel.mry M.nN,em.m appnrenrm rower a.ah. we,mct k+de moual arromm,of IN rate,w Irloe w hall,m pay whin dwl.all bbrvwt ewe.,ckwpn aid Nm..wim wew.I,m.rd palmy M a" prl deme.Ohm(h apptr b N pAM M.m�arww kneto;al cin.TeF tri t,pM.e.d m:.TNe SIIouW TNNm tui a ma►r rIy pnmem M m do wry r n hnelw pmrided,de•I aewRnary M TMww•tint widlw aM►wa e a A..b.mM.a nw:w an a dru,Md opow TMeor bad.ilt.ar wk.xnl lYmrww from bay vM:aw:an NIe,"•+Y"nW e w du de.Mme k..rm mruwr ab r..a1 nw a rider mq hem ntce..ry m. mc INwarily Need,ltrerm,ry w Tied l awhor4W b MW LVW tail fM.nil 'a�rr PtR'� pwTan:AFer at aid J �t /AS �, �� x a portion of Phase 3 plus the right of way for the Tank Farm Road extension, totalling approximately 35 acres, together with the right to have released up to 160 Lots thereon. 2.6 Application of Subse uent Princi alal Pa�ment�a. All payments o pr nc pa y Trustor to Bene ciary subsequent to the Down Payment and made pursuant to the $5,000,000 Note which is secured by this Deed of Trust (the "Note") shall be applied as follows, 2.6.1 All such amounts paid to Beneficiary as the release price for one or more Phases or Lots shall be credited against the principal next becoming due on the Note. prepaid under the terms 2of the Note, aent of nd prepayments when due or principal, shall alit as P P yments of such qualify payment of the release price and shall be credited to future releases to the extent not theretofore credited against prior releases. 2.6.3 The price for release for each Lot subsequent to those released in consideration of the Down Payment shall be derived, from time to time, by dividing the principal balance then owing on the Note by the total number of then unreleased Lots as shown on the Specific Plan as it then exists in a binding fashion. For example, if no t principal reduction has yet been made on the Note and the Specific Plan as then adopted shows 336 Lots yet to be -eleased, then the release price shall be $5,000,000/338 $13,783 per Lot. 2.7 Releases from Underlying Deed of Trust. Beneficiary uncondiEiona y covenants and agrees to obtain appropriate releases from the lien of tl:e Underlying Deed of Trust so that upon the release of any Lot or Phase as hereinabove provided, any lien thereon of the Underlying Deed v of Trust shall, without cost, expense, or delay to Trustor be concurrently released. 3. Miscellaneous 3.1 Unenforceabilit . If any provision of this Rider or the app cat on hereof to any person or circumstance shall be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Rider and the application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be effected thereby and shall be enforced to the extent permitted by law. C -3- any party to 3.2 Attorne Fees. Should it the other to enforcecthe n act on at law or the Prevailingbe necessary for the losing r Party shallavean provision ofuity against determined ti ntpm rty for reasonable a right to this Rider, attorne judgment against Y's tees and costs as all 3.3 Coo erasion ttme step° necessary' sem_�t Beneficiary agrees time, Promptly upon written the Trustee, g to take areas f Without consideratlon request of from time to of the Trustor con?eeyed to PrOPertY. wherever r compensatton to partially to dedicatedomeowner's associalocateed, eitherany and all , conditions to by the public,tion or I1) to be connection Nithir°d (x) either Pursuant anchor (2) Parcel maps(°) or he governmentalapprovalagencY Pwhether to development of Otherwise Y final subdivision in or J the Property. (Y) in connection with thor e agrees to, w 3.4 Joinder. time ithout cons eratlOnBeneficiary shall, authgr�ro Ptly upon the w and hereby Trustees to rltten requestpof9Tilon, from time to zesPro development planter into and ustor. and �+n Yt (2) any or join r the affecting public streets or ways, amendment thereto or an a ( ) an Portions of th affecting the l the about Y portion sof 3 Y grant a pro Ilk e] and the pr of easement Perry for A covenants 14) any grant(sje- for public (s) over, in, - fi thutilities at O1 rights similar easements, dedications, ere reasonabl Or dissimilar Property or anY portionnthe saryeng tO the development fore g P ent otgo�he the tact 3.5 oat t will be requested releases 7m lementetion. In recoq quested from time roPart tim rT_asea of the°ltIon or e• operty Beneficiary agrees srthat that i -4- �• ,_,,.., �.5�-, .. VOL 2888 '�716 2874„a 372 4� �• 1 {1( fE such releases shall be implemented promptly upon the satisfartion of the conditions precedent thereto. atj THE PACIFICA CORPORATION, WA a Cali rnia co pon EM By• J n Hedberg ts: President By: M rgar t M. Dykes ts: Secretary C "Trustor" PACIFIC VENTURES, a California joint ventuu By: ROADRUNNER, a California limited partnership, a joint venture partner by: Rot/ o s , Geneca Partner By: EASTHINDS, N.V. , a Netherland Antilles Corporation, a joint venture pjrner � oug a Hur oc , Attorney-in-Fact "Beneficiary" C- ._ -5- vaL2888p1717 1vk2874rwM 1 O Schematic outline of deeds affecting Islay Hill open space. Date Book Document and notes 10/3/84 2640p.592 Deed of Trust-Dr. John Devincenzo sells property to Pacific Ventures for $2.453 million. Open space described as released from lien on receipt of down payment. 8/7/86 2888P.706 Deed of Trust-Rob Rossi sells property to Pacifica for exactly 5 million dollars. Rob Rossi has "succeeded to sole beneficial interest in Pacific Ventures. Eastwinds NV, a Netherland Antilles corporation also signs the deed contract. John Devinceno and Rob Rossi have both concluded several assignments of deeds of trust with EastwindsNV. 1/xx/87 2934-0542 Power of Attorney-Devincenzo assigns Rossi P-0-A. 7/xx/87 3021 p.167 Assignment of Deed of Trust- Rob Rossi assigns interest and receives a loan on the property. Rossi was served with a lien by the IRS for non-paynment of taxes in May 1987. The lien was served against Rossi's personal and Rossi-King Organization property. 1/15/88 3097p.106 Modified trust deed- A four party agreement between Dr. John Devincenzo, Rob Rossi, Pacifica, and the banks holding deeds of trust. Devincenzo reduces his lien on the property to the open space portion of the property. He is described as being owed $759,000 in principal plus interest. This principal is due and payable on Dec. 1, 1988. 8/xx/88 3296p794 The French Brothers sign an option agreement with Northwinds NV, a Netherland Antilles corporation, to purchase a portion of the La Lomita Ranch. adjacent to the Islay Hill properEv. This option evidently has not been exercised. Rob Rossi's name appears on this option agreement as a principle of the NorthwindsNV corporation. 2/xx/89 3265-495 Devincenzo makes a full reconyevance of title on the. Islay Hill property. C ' 2/I4/90 SLO-89-291 Northwinds NV proposes a subdivision of the Islay Hill open space, Known owners and/or Trustors of the various Netherland Antilles* corporations. Eastwinds NV-- Rob Rossi, John Devincenzo, Robert Takken, Douglas Murdock is "attorney-in-fact" Southwinds NV--Rob Rossi Northwinds NV--Rob Rossi, John Devincenzo, Doglas Murdock is "attorney-in- fact" Westwinds NV-- John and Charles French mream consciousnegs , �,,_, Local Affili URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL 314 Higuera St., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 544-6723 L BOARD OF JUP4 DIRECTORS Jun=• 6 , 1990 07 1.1!FY CL E Fi K Honorable City Council SA I LJJ;S-0 S i S P 0.CA City of San Luis Obispo V 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 URBAN CREEKS Dear Mayor and City Council Members: COUNCIL CHAPTERS In Re Tract 1750 ( " Islay Hill " Subdivisions) : We ,•nu C] ,,t..n., Lh.tne, respectfully request that this communication be ........ made a part of the public record concerning this mat ter . We believe the Environmental Impact Report done ADVISORY BOARD for the Edna Islay Specific Plan in 1982 fails to her rJ.Icn,,+ fulfill the fundamental requirements of the C.-U.1 fi,he.rs clhfnenm rofie,M.'" California Environmental Quality Act with respect X111i%•1111 Sorely.0A6.d Cat-kl.' �7 to the currently proposed ( 1990) subdivisions. In A SIML Project C'nn" C.fiforn'.C..nd.1 r.,U.finnh�.F.nl�, summary, the existing EIR has two major 11,nC Ern�n shortcomi ngs: Anne wnd% D",ntnnnn w Famtn ch.a.hS...C... ..d�. NUnwantnt %1.11VAI'l I It fails to note the presence on site of three candidate endangered species; and 1,,,the S, R"Msnc,A.... 2. There are at least 12 ways in which the proposed development differs from the specific ...... plan for which the earlier EIR was done . Ln nm n10WY.m•. We believe it is incumbent upon the City to .............. ... undertake a subsequent or supplemental EIR prior ....... to considering approval of this project . IULI,nd ti-1.1. The facts and citations which support this _11th'....0......n Ln—M, I•'"'"^'•. ­k ­ 1­11J contention follow. AFFILIATES Staff proposes to use an EIR done for the original Edna-Islay Specific Plan (EISP) ( 1982) without doing further environmental study. CEQA Guidelines Sec . 15182 allows reliance on a .......Crrxl l.n.,, ,..„....r,..... specific plan EIR for residential projects ........ developed pursuant to the specific plan unless "an event described in Section 15162 should occur , ” in rnr.d,nl C re,L­L,h•n which case agency must complete a subsequent EIR %."he,.L,ht.rnu(..anal P,de,o'...1 or supplement to an EIR. Ines In,(1,,1.tnelh,11'.I'do A:.,. 4fI Lleek A'111.1r'.'�Ih.­ Sec . 15162 triggers further study if there are —q­n R,,,, I....... I end,.1 In,1,­1n,,1—X­,.I... ........ changes in the project which may cause "new D,, G.Idl.We'.V1,nn—111,F.Ihl-,I.-Wn,._ i_ significant environmental impacts not considered in a. previous EIR ; " or if "new information of substantial importance . becomes 1m-es avi fable , and - A) The information was not known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIP, was certified. . . , and (B) The new information shows any of the following: 1 . The project will have one or more significant effects not diE.cussed previously in the EIP. • 2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR ; . . . " " If the EIR . .. , has been completed but the project has not yet been approved the Lead Agency :hall prepare or cause to be prepared the subsequent EIP before approving the project ." (emphasis added) The California Public Resources Code (Sec . 21166) also discusses the need for subsequent EIRs or supplements to existing EIRs , :.nd concludes that further study is needed if : " ( a) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the Environmental Impact Report . . . (c ) New information , which was not known and could not have been known at the time of the Environmental Impact Report was certified as carnplete , becomes available . " This language is unambiguous. The existing EISP EIP, states there are no endangered species on the site . Now, however , we know there are three candidate endangered species: the Pacific Pond Turtle , red legged frog, and two—striped garter snake . This has been verified by qualified persons. These were not yet candidate species at the date of the EISP EIR. The EIR does not specifically discuss effects of the project on any of the candidate endangered species. It does not even acknowledge the presence on site of two of the three species. Furthermore , overall , the EIR's handling of wildlife is extremely superficial . There is no indication of extensive scientific literature search in its preparation . Based on the flimsiest of conjecture , the EIP, concludes that with the mitigation measure of a narrow ( 10-20' ) buffer along the creek. . " there will be negligible direct impact . .. . " upon creek wildlife, presumably including the two of the three candidate endangered species which are riparian . The adequacy of such minimal mitigation is questionable since current literature indicates the turtles may roam landward at night for up to one kilometer from their water home in order to nest . An additional issue is that there are at least 12 significant changes in the subdivisions being proposed from the specific pian on which the EIR was done . These include the following: phasing of the project differs; a private recreation area is eliminated; street layout and t­iidths and locations differ ; total density sought is greater than maximum stated in the specific plan ; a medium density housing area is eliminated and replaced by single family housing; the bike pedestrian path intrudes into the riparian " creek preservation area" ; the multi —use railroad landscaped buffer zones are reduced in size or eliminated; development is proposed higher on Islay Hill than shown as the upper limit on the specific plan map ; private lots are shown backing up to Islay Hill open space where the EISP showed a public road at the open space edge ; densities in the medium density housing areas adjacent to Tank Farm Road exceed maximums in the specific plan ; Gtream Ccnsc I ou = =,''1 =_1 a.j% r .aC t r'.age = - torm water detention trategies do not conform to those r:f 'he C .- e,_ ifi _ plan ; and the master bract map sought by the applicants has areuiousl ; been found by . taff to be impermis- ibie under the =pecif ; C :,.Ie believe .; number of the changes are so significant that they kick _=f the need for additional environmental revieiu. One bears directl upon the welfare of the three endangered riparian species : the 1rcposed routing of a bicycle and pedestrian pathway directly through the heart of a "Creek preservat i on area." =nature prese.r ue ) ioh i ch =pans ti+Jo adjacent creeks, the peninsulabetween them , and =over=_. the =ore of the i te ' = least damaged gone of riparian habitat . Under the _peri4ic plan this .area i s supposed to be off-limits to human act. iitl . This routing is proposed in direct in contravention of the pecific plan , which shows a, bike path location vihich avoids the =_eruation area . .approvals of a previ ous adjacent subdivision :Tract 1376) by both the Planning Commission and City Council on tai ned condi tions _.tipuIating the path must be '. orated as shown on `he E1SP map . Staff presented a. report to Council at the time of 7ina1 map approval +•.r Trac .`_ 137o stating those conditions 1,,lere met . :espito the fact maps in staff' s possession showed they !a!ere not being met . The existence of these maps and correspondence relating to them has only recently been discovered by citizens in the course of investigating the current subdivision app.lication' s proposed bike path rerouting. Staff has responded by supporting the proposed violation of the preservation area by the bike path . Staff strategy for dealing with the endangered turtle and the bike path rerouting is to recommend approval of the subdivisions subject to a condition requiring the developer to fund a post-approval study of the turtle to determine if any mitigations are possible . This clearly runs afoul of Sec . 15162 cited above requiring study before approval . Staff seemingly has no strategy at all for the other two endangered species. 'he proposed study-as-mitigation also runs afoul of the basic premise :,f CEQA -- that information be in hand before projects are approved. CEQA clearly affords full " endangered" protection to species such as the turtle , frog and snake in question . Sec . 15330 (b) states : "A species of animal or plant. is ( 1 ) 'Endangered' when its survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy from one or more auses, including less of habitat , change in habitat , Overexploitation , predation , competition , disease , or other factors; or (2) 'Rare' k.,)hen either : (A) Although not present1 ;v threatened with extinction , the species is existing in such small numbers throughout .a.11 or a significant portion of its range that it may become endangered if its environment worsens; or (E) The species is likely to `jecome endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a. significant portion of its range and may be considered ' threatened' as that term is used in the Federal Endangered Species Act . " The section then states in subsection. (c) that an animal or plant is "presumed" C' rare or endangered if listed in state or federal registers, but : " (d) A species not included in any listing identified in subsection (c) =ti .11 nevertheles=s be considered to be rare or endangered if the =stream Cori Sc l iIl_ av 7r' z -age Species can be shown to meet the criteria in subsection (b) . " Those -,- i `.sri .5, are cIeArl .' met by candidate species_ which are being -=onsidered for listing due to habitat loss from development . Court interceret.ations f CEGA mull ,' support our request for =upp1ementaI EIR Court findings relating to the timinq of An environmental study do not support staff' s proposed study—as—mitigation—after—approval . A basic premise of LEGA is that review must occur As early .A'_ feasible in the planning process , not after a project is approved. ( Sunds_ t.rom v County of Mendocino, 1938) ( and LEGA Guidelines 15004 (d) ) . . ( E) nvironmental problems should be considered at .A point in the planning process 'where genuine flexibility remains' (Mt . Sutro Defense Committee v Regents of UC, 1978) . A study conducted after ;.pproual of a prriject 14ill inevitably have a diminished influence on _]eiision—mak ing. Even if the study is subject to administrative Approval , it is_. analogous to the sort of post hoc rationalization of acie.nc;: Actions that has been repeatedly condemned in decisions construing CEQA. " (No Oil , Inc . v City of Los Angeles, 197"; Environmental Defense Fund, Inc . v Coastside County Water District , 1972) Similarly, court decisions relating to standards which establish the threshold of environmental harm which triggers supplemental EIR work also support our request . In a case somewhat similar to the present instance which involved changes to a previously approved plan which a public agency handled in a manner that limited opportunities for renewed citizen environmental review -- which has certainly been the case with the current inconsistencies between the proposed subdivision and the EISP " Concerned Citizens of Costa Mesa v 32nd District Agricultural Assoc . , 198.5) , the Supreme Court ordered a supplemental EIR because of the project changes . The one Appellate case coming to A contrary conclusion is regarded by environmental law authorities as an anomaly . Remy, Thomas, Duggan and Moose ( 1990 edition) caution pub lic agencies against relying on that _ase , pointing out that in the most anomalous related case ( Fund for Environmental Defense) , the court was split , and the issue could have been conceptualized differently with very different results. Authorities such .As P,TD&M anticipate that " courts will tend to err on the side of treating modified development proposals as new projects rather than changed projects" (which would open them up to broad environmental review) , and cite consistency of their view ;A,ith the mandate of Friends of Mammoth : " to afford the fullest pos=_.ibla protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the =_ tatutory language . " C Court rulings on the denial of public participation in environmental review, such as the City's current Tract 1750 strategy involves, have =.lso supported our position . 1 tr Pam Con s i o I =.1 a., Tr.:,.= ` - rP - " Public participation is an essentia.l part of the CEQA Proce=_.s . " state the CE;?A Guideline=_. . A public agency =_.hou1 d provide for ::lime public nvolvement , formal and informal . . . in order to receive and evaluate pac ions. to en v ironm_ ntaI i vsu _ Se c . 15201 , ::.lith court ended) - fusing to _cm Fl l-Jl th requirements to n subsequent EIR viork on new information/changed conditions , the City shortcircuits the public ' s opportunity for involvement . Court=_ have frowned upon such an approach . The public holds a " privileged position" in the CEQA process -- a status reflecting_ both " ' a belief that citizens can make important contributions to environmental protection and notions of democratic decision-making. . . "' (Concerned Citizens of Costa Mesa Inc v :32nd District Agricultural Association , 1987) In the Islay Hill projects, there is already a. record of public_ interest in participating in expanded environmental review. In Mountain Lion Coali ` ion v California Fish and Game Commission ( 1989) . the appeals court upheld relief in a similar case where public CEQA participation was truncated, noting that the public "had actively asserted a keen and sophisticated interest' in the agency action and had desired to "fully participte in the assessment of the cumulative impacts associated with th(e) project . " The court directed the agency J to "provide a cumulative impact analysis to the public that encourages rather than impedes meaningful discussion of these important issues. " Finally, courts have condemned public agencies' deliberate avoidance of .actions which would probably kick off CEQA review of a project . In the Islay Hill matter , staff has made a series of decisions regarding deviations from EISP and the need for subsequent EIR work Ljihich have the net effect of truncating public participation in resolving issues of public concern . Regarding deviations between subdivider plans and EISP, staff has denied that some deviations exist ( the bike path change , for instance , was denied publicly until incontrovertible evidence to the contrary was produced by citizens> and has arbitrarily labeled changes enumerated in the EISP as "major" (which require proceeding through the general flan amendment process with Planning Commission and City Council hearings on the EISP changes prior to introducing revised project plans) as "minor" (which can be handled by staff with no public involvement ) . The public has thereby been cheated out of its rightful participation in deciding public planning issues in which it has a full right to participate . Had the proper full and careful public review procedures been followed, it is likely at least some of the "major" changes would have. triggered subsequent EIR work . By avoiding public hearings on the EISP changes and handling the change=_- in-house , staff eliminated the likelihood the changes would be targeted by public comment or common sense for further EIR review. U The courts have held that public agencies may not truncate the CEQA process in this manner . In Friends of Westwood, Inc . v City of Los Stream Consci u� _. i = lay Tract _ Page . ngela _ 1987) . the _.ppeal =_ court ruled that CEQA cannot 'e nterpreted to Qlve agent::- staff the chance to exempt .x project =rom Proper CE-CA review b ' !4alvInQ prior discretionary development revIe •J requirements that would have triggered the statute . it i e,: i of `f L Ll i t.. ♦ _ _ t U=... _ lake fart= and precedents .ha.t l:?e Urge folloua the full and clrear Intent of CEQA by proceeding with .:_. Ubsequent EIR or supplement to the existing EI'=P EIP prier to considering approval of Tract 1750 . [Ale believe it is the responsibility of public officials to uphold the law . r'curs Truly. Judy Neuhauser ,or Stream Consciousness Public Interest %tion Center '" Pi ADCORPORATED of San Luis Obispo County Post Office Box 15113 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 June 6, 1990 To: Honorable City Council, City of San Luis Obispo, CA Re: Proposed Islay Hill subdivision EIR The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the original Edna- Islay Specific Plan is not adequate for the proposed development. The California Environmental Quality Act, Sec. 15162, requires a subsequent or expanded EIR be prepared Lefore project approval if there are changes in the project which may cause new impacts not considered in the previous EIR, or if new information of substantial importance becomes available after the EIR was certified. Both of the above conditions apply to the proposed development . There are significant changes in the proposed subdivisions from the plan on which the EIR was prepared, and new information has come to light. One significant change is the proposed routing of a bicycle and pedestrian pathway through a natural preserve which includes sensitive riparian habitat. The preserve cannot tolerate this level of human activity. The new information includes the fact that there are three candidate endangered species on the site: Pacific Pond Turtle, red legged frog, and two-striped garter snake. The existing EIR states that there are no endangered species on the site. 11 Oe l f8e L.Lle COULLCll Lo 1ecjuii'e a1L eXI)a LLL1ed CI\ LO Qe'tel'MiLlC TIC impact of these and other new factors before project approval . Sincerely yours , Q FBrac`—' MEEnNC / r / ken, ff��� ` DATE (o president ACENDAt71 is YCOLNCIL CDDE)a F C.1O ❑ RN.D'R. I4/ I...r.IK Lh CL=RIC-0rig l UIQ. . . .and there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right. . . Martin Luther King, A