HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/21/1990, 1 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION TO DENY A VARIANCE TO PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR AN OFFICE AND A 1111 Ip1111�lJ city Of San _JI S OBI SPO
Nft COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MN NUMBER:
FROM: Arnold Jonas Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Greg Smith, Associate Plann
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commissionactio to deny a variance to parking
requirements for an office and apartments located at the east corner of
Santa Rosa and Peach Streets (Application V 1481).
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached resolution upholding the Planning Commission's decision to deny
variance application V 1481, a request to reduce the parking requirement for an office
and apartments at 756 Santa Rosa Street from six spaces to four spaces, or to allow
tandem parking spaces (which encroach in the required street yard setback area) for non-
residential uses.
REPORT IN BRIEF
The applicant/appellant's office is located in a building which was formerly a residence.
The office conversion was allowed in 1982 pursuant to a use permit which allowed use
of off-site parking on an adjoining lot (A114-82). The approved off-site parking is no
longer available, and the applicant has been unable to locate other off-site parking.
Consequently, the applicant has three options:
1. Provide additional on-site parking, which would involve demolition of an
existing garage. i
2. Obtain a variance to allow the office use to continue with the four existing
spaces.
3. Convert the office back to residential use.
In previous reports and hearings, the Planning Commission, Hearing Officer, and planning
staff, have all concurred that there are no special circumstances applying to the site
which would justify the variance.
DISCUSSION
Situation
The Administrative Hearing Officer conducted a hearing on this application on April 27,
1990. The application was denied, based on the findings noted in the attached minutes
of the hearing. The Planning Commission denied the applicant's appeal on July 11,
1990. Minutes of the previous hearings are attached.
V 1481
Page 2
Data Summary
Address: 756 Santa Rosa Street
Applicant/Appellant: Steve Wathen
Zoning: O
General Plan: Office
Environmental Review Status: Categorically exempt from review requirements.
Action Deadline: October 27, 1990
Site Description
59 x 14Y comer lot developed with several wood frame structures: a duplex, a garage,
and a residence which has been converted to office use. The site is surrounded by
houses, apartments and offices.
EVALUATION
The house on the site was converted to office use in 1982. An administrative use permit
was approved (A 114-82, attached) which allowed the conversion subject to several
requirements:
- The duplex on the property would be occupied only by elderly tenants, thus
reducing its parking requirement from three spaces to two.
- Two off-site parking spaces would be required, to be located on the adjacent
property at 764 Santa Rosa Street.
- Four parking spaces would be provided on-site, including the existing three-car
garage-
- The city would be notified in writing if the off-site parking were no longer
available, and the office would be reconverted to residential use if alternative
parking which met city standards could not be provided.
The city was notified in December 1989, that the off-site parking agreement was
terminated. Staff has been working with the applicant since that time to investigate
alternative parking which would meet city standards.
The applicant filed an application for off-site parking in February, the application (A 23-
90) was denied on March 22, 1990, after the applicant failed to provide parking which
was not already fully committed to other uses.
The variance application asks that the overall parking requirement be reduced from six
spaces to four (the number of city-standard spaces currently provided on-site), or that
tandem parking be counted toward meeting the office parking requirement.
/-Z
V 1481
Page 3
The applicant proposes two pairs of tandem spaces to meet the office parking
requirement, but the Zoning Regulations allow tandem parking only for residences, where
both spaces are assigned to the same unit. Two of the office parking spaces would also
encroach into the required fifteen-foot street yard, and a car occupying the fourth space
would block each of the other three.
1. Required Findings
The city's Zoning Regulations allow a variance to be approved only where it is the only
option which would allow reasonable use of property which is subject to unusual
circumstances.
Three specific findings must be made:
A. Circumstances apply to the site which do not apply generally to land in the
vicinity with the same zoning - such as unusual size, shape, or topography.
B. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege - an entitlement
which is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with
the same zoning.
C. The variance will not adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity.
In the judgement of the Hearing Officer and Planning Commission, the required findings
could not be supported. Staff concurs with that evaluation.
2. Development Alternatives
Staff has discussed alternatives with the applicant which would provide six on-site spaces
which meet city standards. These alternatives would involve demolition of the garage,
and might also involve alterations to the house's back porch and/or the duplex's entry
stairway.
Another alternative which would meet city standards would be to restore the house to
residential use. The applicant has argued that the noise and lack of privacy make the
house poorly suited for residential use. Staff believes it would be feasible to correct
these deficiencies:
- A fenced or walled private yard could be provided between the house and
garage.
- Double-glazed windows, installed in conjunction with a "whole house" fanor air
conditioning, would provide significant reduction of traffic noise inside the house.
In evaluating a standard for "reasonable" use of the property staff suggests the
AS
V 1481
Page 4
commission consider the range of development which would be possible on the site if it
were vacant:
- Residential density would be limited to 1.93 equivalent units. Three one-
bedroom units could be built, and five parking spaces would be required. If the
existing house reverts to a two-bedroom unit, as allowed by the previous use
permit, there will be 232 units with four parking spaces. By current standards,
returning to the pre-conversion residential density clearly allows reasonable use of
the property.
- For a mixed-use development, it might be possible to build a duplex and 1500
square feet of office space - slightly more than the 1150 square feet of office
currently provided - and still meet minimum parking requirements.
- Office development potential on a similar vacant site would be 2400 to 3600
square feet. The higher figure assumes second floor office space above ground
level parking.
The site is in a neighborhood which is affected by "overflow" parking from downtown
employees, and no parking is permitted on this segment of Santa Rosa Street.
Availability of curbside parking is likely to be less than in other sectors of the city.
ALTERNATIVES -
The council may uphold or deny the appeal, utilizing the draft resolutions attached, or
may continue the application with direction to the applicant and staff regarding additional
information or modifications desired. If the appeal is denied, the office will have to be
converted back to residential use, unless alternative parking is provided.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the council adopt the attached draft resolution upholding the Planning
Commission's decision to deny variance application V 1481, based on the findings cited
by the Planning Commission and Hearing Officer.
Attachments: Draft Resolutions: Denial, Approval of Use Permit
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Applicant's Letter
Planning Commission Minutes (Forthcoming)
Administrative Hearing Minutes
gtsd:v1481cc.wp
i-y
1
O
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL FROM THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO
DENY VARIANCE APPLICATION V 14819 A REQUEST TO ALLOW
REDUCED PARKING FOR AN OFFICE AND APARTh NTS AT
t6 SANTA ROSA STREET
WHEREAS, the Administrative Hearing Officer conducted a public hearing
on Variance Application V 1481, on April 27, 1990, and denied the application; and
WHEREAS, the decision of the Hearing Officer was appealed to the
Planning Commission, which conducted a public hearing on July 11, 1990, and determined
to deny the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed that decision to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the council has considered the testimony and statements of
Othe applicant, .appellant, and other interested parties, and the records of the
Administrative and Planning Commission hearings and actions, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the council determines that the action of the Planning
Commission was appropriate;
NOW, THEREFORE, the council resolves to deny the appeal and affirm
the action of the Planning Commission, thereby denying Use Permit Application A 20-
90 subject to the following findings adopted by Planning Commission:
1. There are no circumstances applying to the site, such as size, shape, or
topography, which do not apply generally to land is the vicinity with the same
zoning.
2. The variance would constitute a grant of special privilege, in thatit would
allow an intensity of development inconsistent-with the limitations placed upon
other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
O
�`S
r 1
Resolution No. (1990 Series)
V 1481
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 Adnunistrative Office
caDs�
o ey
Community Deve ent Director
O
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL FROM THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND
APPROVING VARIANCE APPLICATION V 1481, A REQUEST TO ALLOW
REDUCED PARKING FOR AN OFFICE AND APARTMENT`S AT
M SANTA ROSA STREET
WHEREAS,;the Administrative Hearing Officer conducted a public hearing
on Variance Application V 1481, on April 27, 1990, and denied the application; and
WHEREAS, the decision of the Hearing Officer was appealed to the
Planning Commission, which conducted a public hearing on July 11, 1990, and determined
to deny the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed that decision to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the council has considered the testimony and statements of
the applicant, appellant, and other interested parties, and the records of the
Administrative and Planning Commission hearings and actions, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the council determines that the action of the Planning
Commission was not appropriate;
NOW, THEREFORE, the council resolves to approve the appeal and
approve Variance V 1481, thereby allowing tandem parking spaces which encroach in the
required street yard setback area, subject to the following findings.
r
1. There are special circumstances applying to the site, which do not apply
generally to land in the vicinity with the same zoning, including the existence of
a structure which contributes the character of the adjacent Mill Street Historic
District.
2. The variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege, since it would
not allow an intensity of development inconsistent with the limitations placed upon
other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
3. The variance will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of persons
living or working in the vicinity.
I
Resolution No. (1990 Series)
V 1481
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 J
APPROVED:
/57
Ci trauve OttzCer
torn �l� -
Community DevelopbAnt Director
/�Sr
t b
� O•i f1. - ••• 4
+ � .• • .�:sty � � s.�+
v .
,,,moo, . ,_ _ . :z \�. ••��.c
� S
cm
'L Ott'. �v/ S• `'9 r
J /
lob
•� � t�J s1 � VV S S
f. .}fit. y �•0 14T;s >^• • 4• L �,�
e
K 16
•. �j�C
•i i . .fir n '�F �� J 4b' i �•.�.•' 4 $ �•
Nr
,
.Y A 9 0'• 1
O s .
'•T
OV
_:.4.-a-7_.� . GT
__ -__'i<3i:. ___ --nl�_--•---_
::Z:4 7:. H ft.
:.
'.
---
:f:
sus �sav �s
i
y -
G
� � I
T - _
I �1eESS
/
Ec
40
4
v �
I
I ;
Gal
City of san luis oBispo
990 Palm StreetlPosf Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo.CA 93403.8100
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Title 1. Chapter
1 .20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals
from the decision of Planning Commission rendered
on which decision consisted of the following (i.e.
set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal .
Use additional sheets as needed) :
(See attached)
7
The undersigned discussed the derision being appealed from with:
on
Appellant:
Steve Wathen
RECEIVED Name/Title
JUL 1 9 1990 Representative
1115 Peach St.
MN LNSCLPX
081SM.CA Address
543-7127
Phone
I
Original for City Clerk
Copy to City Attorney
Ca en red fpr: Copy to City Administrative Officer
Copy to the f llowing department(S) :
A. Jonas op
r
City Cie k
G Steven R. Wathen
1115 Peach Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 543-7127
July 19, 1990
SLO City Council.
c/o City Clerk
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
To Whom It May Concern,
We are formally submitting an appeal for our variance
request in regards to 756 Santa Rosa; a reduction in parking,
Case Number V1481. Please schedule a calendar date for us to
formally appeal to City Council.
Thank you for your time.
OSincerely,
Steven R.athen
SW/zb
RECEIVED
O JUL 1 91990
SA19 LUIS 0e9M.CA
� I
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING - MINUTES
FRIDAY APRIL 27, 1990
756 Banta Rosa street. Variance Appl. V1481; Request to allow
reduced parking; 0 zone; Steve .Wathen,
applicant.
Greg Smith presented the staff report, noting that in .1982, a house
on this property was converted to office use. This increased the
parking requirement, and a use permit was approved which allowed
the office conversion, subject to providing two parking spaces off-
site on adjoining property. Those spaces are no longer available
to the applicant. He explained that the applicant is asking that
the parking requirement for the office conversion be reduced by two
parking spaces, either by allowing him to provide those parking
spaces as tandem spaces (two spaces lined up one behind the other)
and encroaching in the street setback, or by eliminating the
parking requirement for two spaces. Mr. Smith felt there is not
sufficient justification to support the findings which are required
for a variance; therefore staff recommends denial of the variance
application, based on three findings which he outlined.
The public hearing was opened.
Steve Wathen, applicant, spoke in support of his request. He _.
pointed out that parking has never been a problem; in fact, the
parking spaces were rarely, if ever, used. He noted that when the
city widened Santa Rosa Street, it eliminated the front and side
yards, making it non-functioning as a single-family residence, were
it ever to be reverted. He further stated that the building is
without hot water or kitchen facilities, and would be .inoperable
as a residence without major renovations. He noted that there are
only three houses used as residences on Santa Rosa Street from
Pacific Street to Highland Drive, which is several miles. He
didn't feel reverting 756 Santa Rosa Street back. to a residence
would not be appropriate. Mr. Wathan noted there is a 30-minute
green zone that fits three compact and two full size vehicles on
the Peach Street side of the building, which has worked
successfully for the use thus far.
Mr. Wathan explained there are two businesses in the house; both
data-related businesses, which means there are seldom customers
coming to the business except to pick up the classified computer
lists, and many of those people come on mopeds and bicycles. He
further stated that any time of the day between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
one can go by the business and find available parking spaces.
Based on the history of the operation, without using the off-site
spaces, he said he felt the request should be approved.
Doug Greenfield, applicant's architect, spoke in support of the j
request. He noted that what was once a street is now a state
highway, and would make reversion of the property back to a
residence unacceptable. He mentioned that the type of business at
this location is not one where customers spend much time; the
average is about 10 minutes per visit. He reaffirmed that there
is never a problem finding a ,parking place. He said his applicant
is asking for "minor relaxation by the Director" which is what a
variance application is for. He felt that in this case, and based
on the history of this business, that the request is within the
requirements for approval of the variance.
The public hearing was closed.
Greg Smith noted that staff is aware that the traffic level is high
on Santa Rosa Street, and that the widening of Santa Rosa Street
did involve purchase of property by Cal Trans, and that traffic
conditions existed for a number of years prior to 1982 during which
time residences where located within the subject building. Mr.
Smith further noted that the O zone is a residential as well as
office zone and there is no city policy which would consider it
inappropriate to restore this .building suitably as a residence.
He explained it might mean that additional noise mitigation is
appropriate, but staff originally recommended approval of, and
still recommends approval of off-site parking as the preferred
option for resolving the difficulty.
Steve Wathan added that there is space to provide bicycle and moped
O parking spaces, which would work well with the type of traffic that
the business has.
Terry Sanville explained that the City enables the conversion of
residential uses to offices within the O zone, and it is happening
all over the city, especially in the older portions of the town
along Mill and Palm Streets. The traditional strategy for
accommodating the parking needs of the office spaces is to serve
a rear yard parking lot by a driveway, as evidenced near City Hall,
all along Palm Street. He explained that the problem with the
subject site is that not only is a house being used as an office,
but there is also a duplex there which constrains the amount of
area that is available for parking. He noted that when the city
originally approved the use permit for the off-site parking, it
determined that the location of that off-site parking met city
standards and, in fact, would serve the parking needs of this use.
Mr. Sanville expressed his failure to see, at this point in time,
where the physical aspects of the use of the site would change that
parking requirement that is in fact required for all office
conversions within the city. Based on this, Mr. Sanville said he
felt he could not make the required findings for approval. Mr.
Sanville felt that to assume that certain office combinations
within the house will indefinitely lead to an underutilization of
the parking spaces is not a good strategy. He further explained
that city standards exist to ensure minimum performance of
development.
Mr. Sanville further stated that he has no problem with the
continuation of the office use on the site, subject to the
r-4s
provision of parking which, again, can be located off-site. He
then explained that this issue today is not one of preferring
residential use to office use, but the assessment that office use
is the predominant use in the area is accurate, with the exception
of the side streets. Mr. Sanville said it is his feeling that the
parking should be provided, either on- or off-site, and that the
required findings for approval cannot be made. Therefore, he
denied the variance request, based on the following findings:
1. There are no circumstances applying to the site, such as size,
shape or topography, which do not apply generally to land in
the vicinity with the same zoning.
2. The variance would constitute a grant of special privilege,
in that it would allow an intensity of development
inconsistent with the limitations placed upon other properties
in the vicinity with the same zoning.
3 . The variance would adversely affect the safety and welfare of
persons residing and working in the vicinity by reducing the
availability of public parking and by contributing to traffic
hazards.
Mr. Sanville explained that this decision could be appealed to the
Planning Commission within 10 . days of the action, by any person
aggrieved by the decision. �
Administrative Hcat^ nutes
Meeting of December 10, 1982
Page 2
O Permit A 1. 113-82. Request to allow reduced street yard setback iron _"U 1c:ct
to 1.0 feet; 1867 Fixlini Street; R-1 zone; Barry Williams,
applicant.
Greg Smith presented the staff report, recommending approval subject to four
conditions which he outlined. He noted that the existing setback of the building
from the southeast property line was non-conforming. Since additions to non-
conforming buildings are not allowed unless approved by use permit, any action to
approve the requested street yard setback reduction would also have to approve the
existing side yard setback.
The public hearing was opened.
Barry Williams, applicant, spoke in support of the request. He noted that the
entire house, including the proposed addition; would be covered with new horizontal
siding. The purpose of the addition was to shelter the entry from the weather, aitd
to improve the design and appearance of the house.
Ken Bruce approved Use Permit A 113-82, subject to the following conditions:
1. Exterior materials and design details shall be to the approval of Community
Development Department staff.
2. Applicant shall install sidewalk to city standards at property frontage.
Installation may be deferred, subject to the property owner signing a covenant
Oto install sidewalk on 30 days written notice from the City Engineer.
3. ,lpplic,nnt shall install street trees to city standards at property frontage, to
Lilt? approval of Public Works Department staff.
4. Approval i.� livreby grant6d for side vard sorback reduction from S feet to 5 loci
lat southonst property line for existing building.
la e Permit App 1. 114-8L. Request to allow office and residential use on same site,
and to allow off-site parking; 756 and 764 Santa Rosa
Street; 0 zone; Tir Rondthaler, applicant .
Greg Smith presented the staff report, noting that the :application had herr, revised
to include provision of elderly housing in thv existing duplex. He recommended
approval subject to conditions which he outlined.
The public hearing was opened.
Tim Rondthaler, applicant, spoke in support of the request. He noted that about
half of the house at the front of the property had been converted to office use, :end
the other half was used as an apartment. He asked for consideration to let the
residential use remain, as the arrangement worked well for the residential use as
well as his business.
O Sorrel Davis indicated that she was the apartment tenant. She stated it was a
good residential situation for her and asked that she be allowed to stav for as lona
as possible; hopefully one year.
Tim Rondthaler stated he had no problem with the recommended conditions, :and submitted
a letter from property owner Inez Austin agreeing to rent the existinF. dople•x tc,
elderly persons only.
Administrative Hearint, Minutes
Meeting of December 10, 1982
Page 3
The hearing was closed.
Ken Bruce approved use permit A 114-82, subject to the following; conditions:
1. Duplex units at 1119 and 1121 Peach Street shall be used only as housing for
the elderly (occupants limited to persons 62 years of age or older).
2. A total of six parking spaces shall be required for all uses on the site. Two
spaces shall be on-site for employees and customers of the office use. Two
spaces may be off-site at 764 Santa Rosa Street. Applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Department staff, written authorization or lease agree-
from property owner of 764 Santa Rosa Street showing his authorization oC
applicant to install and use two additional parking •spaces on his property. All
parking spaces shall be available for intended use at all times.
3. Applicant and property owner shall record an agreement witin the ciry indicating:
the following:
a. Cite shall be notified in writing if use of duplex as elderly housing is
terminated.
b. City shall be notified in writing if off-site parking is ter:^inated.
c. Structure used as office shall revert to use as a sinfle-fa^ily residencef
immediately after termination of off-site parking or elderly housing;,
unless alternate parking is provided to city approval.
4. All conditions shall be met within 90 days (March 10, 1950 .
In response to a question from the applicant, Ken Bruce indica_ed that t o
capped tenant currently occupying one of the duplex units uou:c be a::owec to rcmai;i
indefinitely, but the tenant in the office structure would have to relocate within
90 days.
Pse Permit Appl . 115-82. Request to allow temporary portraix phorurraphy studit,
to operate on the following datys: November 30 to
December 4, 1982; December 20 f December 31, 1952;
January 17 to January 21, 1983; 1604 >lonterev Street ;
C-T zone; Olan Mills, applicant.
Greg Smith presented the staff report, noting that the applicant had requested
approval to operate out of the motel on the following dates:
November 30 to December 4 - Photo sessions
December 20 to December 31 - Photo sessions and reviewing proofs
January 17 to January 21 - Reviewing prou- s
Tire business also maintains a telephone office at 1204 Higucra Streut. St,aii j
recommends approval of the temporary use permit, subject to conditions which wcrvl
out lined, but noted .that the use could not be approved at the same 1pcation in ti:"
future because of. pending changes to the Zoning Regulations..
1'lie publii wring; was opened.
OR
(�I Cl of sAn MIS omspo
�
990 Palm Street/Post Office Boz 8100 - San LuisOblapo. CA 93403-8100
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as authorized by Title I . Chapter
1 .20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals
from the decision of planning Commission _ rendered
on which decision consisted of the following (i .e.
set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal .
Use additional sheets as needed) :
(See attached)
O
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed from with:
on
Appellant:
y Steve Wathen.
RECEIVED Name/Title
JUL 1 9 1990
Representative
1115 Peach St.
SppLL119 69M, Address
543-7127
Phone
Original for City Clerk
CICopy to City Attorney
Ca en red fpr: Copy to City Administrative Officer
l(/J Copy to the fQllowing department(s) :
A. Jonas 1�
City Cle k
Steven R. Wathen
1115 Peach Street
i
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 543-7127
July 19, 1990
SLO City Council
c/o City Clerk
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
To Whom It May Concern,
We are formally submitting an appeal for our variance
request in regards to 756 Santa Rosa; a reduction in parking,
Case Number V1481 . Please schedule a calendar date for us to
formally appeal to City Council.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Steven R. athen
SW/zb
RECEIVE®
JUL 1 91990
a�.s�rrot.�c
-q"UJsae00,CA
�IIIO�II�Illllll�llll���� �Illlllllifll � -
C1
of
sAn luis oaspo
O990 Palm Sttset/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
August 9, 1990
Mr. Steven Wathen
1115 Peach St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Appeal of Planning Commission
Dear Mr. Wathen:
The San Luis Obispo City Council will hold a public hearing to
consider an appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission to deny
to request to allow a parking reduction at 756 Santa Rosa Street.
The meeting is scheduled for August 21, 1990, beginning at 7:00
O p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Other
hearings may be held before or after this time.
For additional information or questions concerning your appeal,
please contact Greg Smith in the Community Development Department
at 549-7174. The Council agenda report with recommendation by staff
should be available by the Wednesday prior to the hearing.
Sincerely,
- u
Pm Voges, ICS
City Clerk
PV:ljh
cc: Greg Smith, Community Development Department
O
�►��������►►►►►iII�IiIIIIiIIIII @iii�iii►� cofsan l�,s oBispo ,
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
August 9, 1990
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
APPEAL - PLANNING COMMISSION - 756 SANTA ROSA STREET
our records indicate that your property or business is
located near the subject property. You are, therefore, being
noticed that the San Luis Obispo City Council has received an
appeal of a Planning Commission decision to deny a request to allow
a parking reduction at 756 Santa Rosa Street.
The agenda report, including recommendation by staff,
will be available for review in the City Clerk's Office (Room #1
of City Hall) on the Wednesday before the meeting.
The meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 21, 1990,
beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990
Palm Street. Other public hearings may be held before or after
this item. The public is welcome to attend and comment and written
comments are encouraged. For more information, please contact
Greg Smith in the Community Development Department at 549-7174.
P m Voges, (qty Clerk.
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100•Sart gals Obispo,CA 93403-8100
August 9, 1990
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
APPEAL - PLANNING CO1+ aSSION - 756 SANTA ROSA STREET
Our records indicate that your property or business is
located near the subject property. You are, therefore, being
noticed that the San Luis Obispo City Council has received an
appeal of a Planning Commission decision to deny a request•to .allow
a parking reduction at 756 Santa Rosa Street.
OThe agenda report, including recommendation by staff,
will be available for review in the City Clerk's Office (Room 11
of City Hall) on the Wednesday before the meeting.
The meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 21, 1990, u
beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Council %ambers of City Hall, 990 •Y;
Palm Street. Other public hearings may be held before or- after
this item. The public is welcome to .attend and comment and written
comments are encouraged. For more information, please contact q "
Greg Smith in the Community Development Department at 549-7174. : ,. .
P Voges,Vitty
Clerk ,: .
�s SGntc; SCS
FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FIL ER: Y WT
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
694 SANTA ROSA 694 SANTA ROSA 695 SANfA
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401=2802 SAN'LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401-2802 SAj1•LU1S OBI CA 93401-2801
FILE NUMBER: V 1481. FILE NUMBER:, V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
755 SANTA ROSA 756 SANTA ROSA M A 756 SANTA ROSA M B
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401-2803 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401-2804 SAN LLIS OBISPO. G 93401'2804
FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER- V 1481
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
763 SANTA ROSA 764 SANTA ROSA 769 SANTA ROSA
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401-2803 SAN LUIS OBISPO,. CA 93401-2804 SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA 93401-2803
002-315-0024 / FILE NUMBER: V 1481 002-313.0027 / FILE NUMBER: V 1481 002-314-0023 / FILE NUMBER: V 1481
694 SANTA ROSA ST PTP SOM001 LE i SR FREDRAN i SMITH
1108 GARDEN ST 695 SANTA ROSA PO BOO(_ 1446
SAN LUIS OBISPO. G 93401-3509 SAN LWS OBISPO, CA 93401=2893 SAN LUIS OBISPO. CA 93406-1446
002-316-0019 / FILE NUMBER: V 1481 002-314-0023 /FILE NUMBER: V 1481 002-316-0018 / FINE NIi1BER: V 1481
AUSTIN INEZ R TRE FREOMAN i SMITH CHEUMIS ROBERT T i KUURA II
1128 PEACH PO BOX 1446 11605 ATASGDERO AVE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, G 93401-2819 SAN LUIS OBISPO, G 93406-1446 ATASCADERO, CA 93422-5905
002-314-0023 / FILE NLMRER: V 1481 002=316-0004/File Number V 1481 002-315-0011/File Number Y Wt
FREDRAN i SMITH Fisealini AC Righatti A etal
PO BOX 1446
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93406-1446 --- PO Boz 755 S Righetti 11
Cambria. CA 93428-0755 251 Chorro Street
San Luis Obispo. CA 93401-2315
FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481 _.
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
1119 PEACN 1120 PEACH 1121 PEACH
SAN LUlib!IISPO, G 93401-2818 SAN LUIS OBISPO, G 93401-2219 SMI LUIS OBISPO. CA 93401-2818
FILE NUMBER: V 1481 FILE NUMBER: V 1481
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT
1127 PEACH 1128 PEACH
SAN LUIS_dlBISPO, CA 93401-2818 SAN LUIS OBISPO, G 93401-2819
• 16-00 / FILE NUMBER: V 1481 002x315-0010 / FILE NUMBER: Y 1481 002x316' 19 IL
NUMBER: Y tiBt
AUST R TRE MCCLINTIC FRANCES Y ETAL AUSTIN i R TRE
1128 424 E CRESTON 1128 RN
IS G 93401-2819 SANTA MARIA, G 93454-.1934 UIS OBI G 93401-2819
-sof