HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/04/1990, 1 - APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING A USE PERMIT FOR A NEW HOUSE ON A SENSITIVE SITE, AT ORIGINAL AGF"kMA REPORT FROM 8/7/90
MEETNG D�rl, ;�1ll !!hIliATE:
city of San Luis OBISPO �—_;=-
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEM NUMBER:
FROM: Arnold Jonas, unity Development Director; Prepared
By: Jeff Hoo Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Appeal of a•. Tanning Commission action denying a use
permit for a new house on a sensitive site, at 367 Hill
Street, Use Permit U1463.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
After considering public testimony, Planning Commission comments,
and the staff report, adopt a resolution to uphold or deny the
appeal subject to the appropriate findings and conditions.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The proposed house's size and visual prominence are discussed in
terms of the City's hillside planning standards. The house appears
to comply with most, if not all, of the hillside standards; however
it will be visually prominent due to its large size and visibility
from Chorro Street and State Highway 101. With careful attention
to building colors and materials and landscaping, the house could
be compatible with the neighborhood and its hillside setting.
BACKGROUND
On June 13th the Planning Commission denied a use permit for a new
house on a sensitive site, finding that the house plans it did not
conform to hillside planning standards and were inconsistent with
the objectives of the °S" zone. The property owners have appealed,
and have asked that the City Council uphold the appeal and approve 1
use permit U1463 to allow the house.
In December 1989, the Planning Commission continued this project
with direction to complete a geological evaluation of the site and
restudy the house design. On June 4, 1990, the Architectural
Review Commission continued this project and their comments are
summarized below.
This hillside site is zoned R-1-S, and needs a Planning Commission
use permit before it can be developed. The site's "S" - Special
Considerations designation was applied in 1984 as part of the
Hillside Planning Program. Planning issues include: visual
sensitivity, slope stability and grading, access and open space
preservation. At its February 22, 1989 meeting, the commission
approved a use permit to allow a house on the adjacent lot (U 1411)
for Joe Santacqua. That project has been built, and is almost
ready for final occupancy inspection.
DATA SUMMARY
Appellants/Property Owners: William and Beatrice Jeong
Representative: Rob Strong
� i ►Ilauppi����� city of san Luis oBispo
EftbMe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 2
Zoning: R-1-S and C/OS-20
General Plan: Low-Density Residential and Conservation/Open Space
Environmental Status: Categorically Exempt (CEQA Section 15303)
Site Description: The irregularly-shaped lot covers about two
acres and slopes steeply down to Hill Street. The lot is bisected
by the 320-foot contour, which is the city's urban reserve line.
The lot's upper half is zoned C/OS-20 and is outside the city's
urban reserve. Slope averages about 23 percent, with a maximum
slope of 40 percent along the site's northern boundary. A concrete
driveway extends up from Hill Street to serve this and the adjacent
two lots, sloping at about 18 to 20 percent, and up to 23 percent
in some areas. Grasses with small shrubs cover most of the lower
slopes, with mature oak trees occurring along and above a ridgeline
at the site's upper end. Houses border the site on adjacent
hillsides to the north and south, and to the east across Hill
Street. KSBY television studio is located on the same side of Hill
Street, just south of the site.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION
If Council upholds the appeal, the appellant will be able to
proceed with the building permit application and plancheck. If the
Council denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's
action, the appellants' project cannot proceed as submitted. They
would need to redesign the project and submit a new use permit
application, or find another house site.
ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Commission
On June 13, 1990 the Planning Commission voted 4 to 2 to deny the
use permit (Commrs. Karlskint and Peterson dissenting; Commr.
Gurnee absent) , based on the findings that:
1. The proposed use does not conform to hillside planning
standards requiring houses to be stepped to follow the natural
terrain and the requirement that hillside grading be
minimized.
2. The proposed house is excessively prominent and does not
fulfill the "S" designation objectives.
There was no public comment at the meeting, nor has staff received
any comments from neighbors. Since the commission's last review
in December 1989, the applicant had submitted additional
information and made several design changes:
1. A geologic hazards report was submitted (Pacific Geoscience,
O, � ►IB��Ip�►���Ij� city Of San tins OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 3
Inc. , February 1990) which concludes that the site is stable
and can safely accommodate the proposed structure; and
2. The height of the front retaining wall was reduced by
"stepping down" the front portion of the house;
3 . The floor plan and building elevations were revised. They now
show a sunken family room and bedroom opening onto a front
portico; and the stair tower has been redesigned reduce its
scale. .
Architectural Review Commission
On June 4, 1990, the ARC unanimously continued the project and
asked the applicant to use a darker stucco color for the main body
of the house, to reduce the horizontal emphasis in the house's
roofline, and to use faster-growing tree species (eg. Monterey
Pines) in addition to oak trees.
Most commissioners felt that the house was appropriately sited and
that it would be compatible with the neighborhood's architectural
character; but they wanted to see a restudy of the house's roofline
and other architectural details to reduce its apparent mass and to
add visual interest. Two commissioners felt that the house should
be stepped more to meet the intent of the Hillside Design
Standards. Commissioners also discussed the issue of house size;
however they did not agree on an appropriate maximum size, nor did
they direct the applicant to reduce floor area.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The apellants want to build a house for their own use. The two-
story, mediterranean-style house would have a total floor area of
about 4500 square feet, and would be served by a common driveway,
and include 3 covered parking spaces plus 2 uncovered parking
spaces.
Grading would involve about 1200 cubic yards of cut, and about 800
yards of fill. A concrete block retaining wall, ranging up to six
feet in height would retain the cut bank at the rear of the house,
and the fill bank at the front. An underground, 1000-gallon water
storage tank for landscape irrigation is also planned.
Basis For Appeal
The appellants explain their appeal in the attached letter. They
cite efforts to comply with staff and Planning Commission
city of San Luis OBISPO
t COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 4
direction, and to meet concerns with the house's scale and design.
They also note that the house's design has been changed to more
closely conform to Hillside Planning standards, and that there has
not been any public opposition at any of the project's public
hearings.
Staff Analysis
At about 4,500 square feet, this is a very large house. The
fundamental issues raised by the Planning Commission seem to be
whether the house's size is appropriate for this site, and whether
its design is "stepped" as required by hillside design standards.
There are other houses of this size located in hillside areas
around the City. However because of this site's visibility from
Chorro Street and State Highway 101, a large house on this site
will stand out. Generally, the larger the house, the more
difficult it is to meet hillside design standards. With the
proposed landscaping, the house does not appear to pose overlook
and privacy problems for neighbors. Over time, with the proper
selection building colors and materials and landscape screening,
the house should be less noticeable and will blend in with the
hillside.
Staff has worked with the applicant to minimize grading and paving,
increase landscaping, and to reduce the house's visual impact by
making several architectural design changes. For example, a
circular driveway originally shown has been deleted, and the house
floor plan has been revised to provide additional "stepping" and
reduce the need for retaining walls.
Project Fit
The house appears to "fit" the site in terms of topography,
setbacks, coverage, and open space:
a. The house conforms to Zoning Regulations for building height,
setbacks, and lot coverage. The site area is about 2 acres,
but its actual buildable area in the R-1 zone is about one-
half the total area. The proposed house covers about 2700
square feet, or about three (3) percent of the total site
area. This is consistent with City standards which allow a
maximum lot coverage of 40% in the R-1 zone.
b. As required by hillside planning standards, recommended
condition 2, Exhibit "B" requires that the remaining 1/2 of
the lot's total area would be preserved as open space through
dedication of an easement to the City. The house is located
at about the 290 foot contour elevation -- well below the C/OS
00s�
°1H��i��i�lfl�p°��►►�I�jj� city of San 1Uis OBISpo
A8&2@ COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 5
zone boundary which follows the 320 foot contour.
c. The plan uses an existing disturbed area, and avoids the
site's steepest portions. About 1,200 cubic yards of cut is
proposed, and about 10,000 square feet of the site would be
disturbed by construction. No additional grading is required
for driveways or utilities, since the site is already served
by both.
Visual Impact
The project does not appear to pose a significant, long-term visual
impact, although initially it will be highly visible from the
neighborhood below. The house would be built on the lower slopes
of Cerro San Luis Obispo, and would be adjacent to two other houses
at approximately the same hillside elevation. There are many
mature oaks on the site, but all are located at the upper portion
of the site and would not be affected by this project.
There are other houses of this size, or larger, located in hillside
areas around the City. However because of this site's visibility
from Chorro Street and State Highway 101, a large house will stand
out. Over time, with the proper selection of colors and landscape
screening, the house will be less noticeable and will blend in with
the hillside.
The house's main visual impact would be from the Chorro Street
neighborhood, from Center Street south to State Highway 101. It
would generally not be visible from major public streets or from
other nearby hillside areas. Due to highway landscaping, the house
would be visible only momentarily by motorists travelling south on
State Highway 101, and not at all by northbound motorists.
Hillside Development Standards
For hillside areas, the City has adopted design standards to guide
staff and commission review. These standards, and the project's
design response, are reviewed below:
a. All building sites must be located totally within the urban
reserve line. Lot lines for individual parcels may cross the
urban reserve line to meet dimension and area requirements of
the subdivision regulations.
The house is sited below the 320 foot contour, and within the urban
reserve and R-1-S zone.
b. Landscaping which is visually compatible with existing
hillside vegetation should be used to screen building
l��;i� city of san lues osispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 6
foundations and provide a landscaped transition between
housing areas and adjacent open space.
Foundation and retaining walls would be densely landscaped, and
front and rear yards would have a range of drought-resistant ground
covers, shrubs and trees to provide a visual transition to the
natural hillside vegetation. Coast Live oak would be the dominant
tree type used to enframe views of and from the house. The plan
appears to meet the City's landscape standards, although more
California native plant species be used, and the ARC that some
faster-growing trees should be included is appropriate. . More
information is needed on irrigation, plant sizes, spacing, planting
details, and erosion control.
c. As a condition of hillside development, the City will secure
land beyond the urban reserve as permanent open space by
scenic or open space easements, fee simple dedication,
parkland dedication, land trades, or other mechanism
acceptable to the City.
The appellants have not proposed any open space dedication, however
they are aware that this is a likely condition of any development
approval. -
r
d. The density allowed by the Cityls C/os zoning of land beyond
the urban reserve shall, at the ownerls discretion, be
transferred to commonly held, adjoining land within the urban
reserve; or be transferred to other residentially zoned land
within the City.
The appellants do not propose, nor do they need, to transfer
allowable C/OS-20 density credit to the R-1-S site. Hillside
planning policies for the Hill Street area allow, but do not
require applicants to transfer the allowed density from the lot,
including both R-1- and C/OS-zoned portions, to other residentially
zoned sites in the city upon approval of a planned development.
e. Grading on individual lots should be minimized. Houses should
generally be built close to the street. The grading of
visible driveways should be minimized.
Staff has worked with the applicant to address several grading and
design concerns. These plans show marked improvement over early
versions, especially with regard to grading. In this revised
design, the amount of cut has been reduced from about 1700 to 1200
CU. yds. By eliminating a previous through-driveway and
portecochere, the designer was able to shift the house and reduce
the amount of cut. The house is located about midway between the
lower end of the lot and the C/OS boundary, about 70 feet above
j ;ll city of San LUIS OBispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 7
Hill Street. In staff's view, the house's location is appropriate,
given the site's topography and existing driveway location.
f. Color and texture of buildings should blend with the natural
landscape, and highly contrasting colors or materials should
be avoided.
The proposed beige house color will contrast with the natural, dark
green colors of the hillside during winter; however it will blend
in within the hillside's light brown colors in late Spring, Summer,
and Fall. A slightly darker earthtone color would blend in better
with the hillside, and the applicant has agreed to return to the
ARC with darker colors as suggested. The mission-tile roof, copper
gutters and downspouts, red brick, split face block, bronze
anodized aluminum window frames, and wood trim will blend in with
the hillside's natural colors, and are appropriate materials.
g. Houses should be built in stepped levels to conform to the
slope of the hill and keep a low profile. The use of
prominent stem walls and foundation piers should be avoided.
The house has been cut into the hillside a depth of about eight
feet so that the upper floor meets grade at the rear of the house.
The foundation steps down three feet from the first floor elevation
at 289 feet to the sunken family room and bedroom set at a finish
floor elevation of 286 feet. The family room and bedroom open onto
a covered portico along the front of the house. A split-face block
retaining wall retains grade at the portico, front entry, and a.
portion of the parking area. The wall would be screened by
drought-resistant shrubs and trees planted around the base of the
house.
With a different floor plan, the house could be stepped more on the
site; however given this appellant's preference for a house of this
size, staff feels that the design responds adequately to the
standard. If the house is stepped more, its overall height could
increase, thus increasing its apparent size and scale from the
neighborhood below.
Slope Stability
This and the adjacent lots above Hill Street are located at the toe
of an ancient landslide. To address concerns with slope stability,
the Planning Commission required an engineering geology report to
be prepared. An engineering geology report has been prepared for
the Jeong house, and the report concludes that the site is stable,
and that it can accotmodate the proposed design. While special
foundation design measures may be required, slope stability does
not appear to be a concern for this project.
�►�� ' Ilull�;p°N�► ii city or san Luis osispo
AWAGs COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff Report
Page 8
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt the draft resolution, Exhibit "A", denying the appeal
and upholding the Planning Commissions action to deny Use
Permit 1463 subject to the recommended findings.
2. Adopt the draft resolution, Exhibit "B", upholding the appeal
and approving Use Permit 1463 subject to the recommended
findings and conditions, or other findings and conditions as
appropriate.
3. Continue the item with direction to the appellant as to design
changes or additional information needed.
RECOMMENDATION
After considering public testimony, Planning Commission comments,
and the staff report, adopt a resolution to uphold or deny the
appeal subject to the appropriate findings and conditions.
Attachments:
-Draft Resolutions
-Appeal Letter
-Vicinity Map
-Reduced Site Plan and Elevations
-Planning Commission Minutes
jh/U1463cc.wp
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
i
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION
DENYING A HOUSE ON A SENSITIVE SITE AT 367 HILL STREET,
(U 1463) .
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 appellants' application and
plans for a use permit to allow development of a two-story, 4500
square foot house on a sensitive hillside site, the apellants'
statements, the Planning Commission's action, and staff
recommendations and reports thereon, hereby denies Use Permit U1463
�.' based on the following findings:
1. The proposed use does not conform to hillside planning
standards requiring houses to be stepped . to follow the
natural terrain and the requirement that hillside grading
be minimized.
2. The proposed house is excessively prominent and does not
fulfill the "S" zoning designation objectives.
3. The proposed use is not appropriate at the proposed
location and will not be compatible with surrounding land
uses, due to the excessive scale and mass of the proposed
house in relation to neighboring houses.
4. The proposed use is categorically exempt -from environmental
review under the City Environmental Guidelines and the
California Environmental Quality Act, Section .15303.
On motion of
seconded by and on the following roll
call vote:
EXHIBIT A.
/f- 9
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day
of , 1990.
Mayor Ron Dunin
ATTEST:
Pam Voges, City Clerk
APPROVED:
C ty dmin tra ive Of icer
to 71ey
Co unity Develti
ent Director
J
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
C A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION DENYING A USE PERMIT
FOR A NEW HOUSE ON A SENSITIVE SITE AT 367 HILL STREET, (U 1463) .
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 appellants' plans and
applications for a use permit to allow a two-story, 4500 square
foot house at 367 Hill Street, (U 1463) the appellants' statements,
the Planning Commission's action, and staff recommendations and
reports thereon, hereby upholds the appeal and makes the following
findings:
1. The proposed project conforms to Zoning Regulations and
Hillside Planning Standards and will be compatible with
adjacent residences and with ,the neighborhood in-terms of
architectural scale, massing, and design;
2. The proposed project is consistent with its environmental
setting in that it includes the following features to
minimize its visual impact:
A. Site and building plans are designed to take
advantage of existing driveway location and
previously graded areas to minimize site
disturbance.
B. Grading for the proposed house has been designed
to minimize the need for prominent stem walls or
tall retaining walls.
C. The proposed house is setback at least 51 feet from
Hill Street, and approximately 60 feet from the
nearest adjacent house.
D. The applicant intents to grant an irrevocable offer
to dedicate an open space easement over
approximately one-half of the lots' total area to
preserve the upper hillside area in its natural
state.
3. Based on the City's Environmental Guidelines and the
California Environmental Quality Act, the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review, CEQA
Section 15303.
C
4. The proposed use will not adversely affect the health,
EXHIBIT B 1X6,11
safety and welfare of persons living or working on the site
or in the vicinity.
5. The proposed use is appropriate at the proposed location
and will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
SECTION 2. Project Approval. Use Permit U1463, allowing
a two-story house at 367 Hill Street is hereby approved subject
the following conditions:
1. The site is considered a sensitive site, and the project
. shall require Architectural Review Commission approval.
2. Applicant shall grant to the City an irrevocable offer of
dedication for an open space easement on that portion of
the lot above the 320-foot contour elevation, to the
approval of the Community Development Director.
3. Applicant shall install building sprinklers and a dry
standpipe for fire protection, to the approval of the
Public Works Department and the Fire Marshal.
4. Applicant shall submit, with any subsequent construction
permit application, an engineering geology report prepared
by a registered engineer licensed by the State of
California to provide such services. Grading, drainage,
and building plans shall strictly conform to the
requirements of the engineering geology report, to the
approval of the Chief Building Official.
5. Drought-tolerant landscaping shall be used which is
visually compatible with the hillside and which screens the
retaining walls and house .foundation, to the approval of
the Community Development Director-.
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 , 1990.
Mayor Ron Dunin
ATTEST:
Pam Voges, City Clerk
APPROVED:
r
VCy-§;Anist-r ive fficer
C' tt e
Community Devel p nt Director
VUC
��lin�i��►'u�Iif��ll�l����� �IpIINCIp�
I�INIu city of san WIS OBISPO
� y
EMP 990 Palm Street/Post 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 flno Rj&j& `,"(4 (� rendered
on JV Ne ,13 11)9 U which decision consisted of the following (i.e.
set forth factual situation and the grounds for submitting this appeal .
Use additional l sheets as needed) : � t
1 1 /
Vul\rel �` VS1:= p2s`'W11� V ()71 Ayr Atvv �WvSc
1 -S S,iz 1 «1- 36-7
RECEIVE ®
AN 1 8 „go
C"Y tart;
UN LUIS OBtPo.eA
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed from with:
IS 1-(11-k on J L, Ae ��j-�10i�4G
A lla
M4 4
Name/Ti le \
r W.I11u� t Rpm )Qs::t0.
Representative
CnP C 6-rry 5�meA SLC-)
Address
Tb� P�Ahh��� 4�Dtrlf sy3ci56C:
Phone
Original for City Clerk
Copy to City Attorney
Calendared for: c?-;7-PD Copy to City Administrative Officer /
Copy to the following department(s) : J
' ON C
City Clecc "
" • ' 'E DVEI.OW SIT R ANMNG ONE BUENA VISTA ROB STRONG
PLANNING a �" �FO 9340, 80$)543.9560
MILL
June 15, 1990
Mayor Dunin and City Counci'lmembers
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
City Hall, 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, Ca.- 93401
Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial, Use Permit 01463,
New house on R-1 S site, 367 Hill Street, Jeong/ Strong.
Dear Mayor Dunin and Councilmembers:
It is unfortunate that the Planning Commission, on.June 13, 1990, deified
use permit U1463, despite staff recommended approval, and without clear
explanation of reasons for this action. In fact, the commission hearing was
closed after a favorable staff report, my presentation of the additional
design refinements we were proposing to respond to the June 4 comments by
the Architectural Review Commission, and information responding to the
december, .1989 concerns of the Planning Commission. There was NO neighbor
other public opposition or concern at any of these prior hearings, but
nn
the majority of the Plairg Commission apparently felt that the visibility
of the house and/or its basic design was unacceptable, despite six months
of applicant modifications to address specific City concerns..
Personally and professionally, I believe the denial to be very unfair and
unjustified: a dangerous and cavalier attitude to the reasonable. private
property rights of the Jeongs, without clear public purpose or b--refit. If
nothing else, the public hearing by the Planning Commission was deficient
since the Commission did not allow the applicant any opportunity to answer
'.questions" of commissioners raised only after the public hearing was
closed. I am thankful that this abuse of authority has a potential redress
by appeal to the City Council and look forward to explaining the Jeong's
proposal to develop this new home on this sensitive site.
If you have any questions or need further information before the public
hearing on this appeal . please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Rab Strong, A.I. P.
c: Jeong
/,w/,<00P
V � ,
O . O `�'
O Op•� O -
p � O
O �`
•'
♦ s�.. ♦�
.
f tt! -x
" VICINITY MAP
w
•'
• -� L ARC 89-122
M
f USE PER _ _
MIT. U1463
L
J 1f �1
•
YI
Loma" Iffi
'
dJ'!5.
y
.s o. J ,�
.,, . � • 1 �f� Iii /f, � n;?;
�► a � ,
11
X•% , la /
Ali14
Lk-
1 .
�� ; T• I
w. {
41
_ 1
- w
-/7
17(1
1 ti t, I O
w b
qq
M
a,: , p R,8 ,
AXT
it
•�y��� ,� 1
J -
o`\
M �
:-}:.; � t: :•... :'-::::....:•::.-.::::�:�::•i::'::�:Vii:'::: �....:.:.:::..�.. ':.�. :.:.
....: .::.::....
<'tY
v...♦
fid:: -:e•T....-„'. �C:�:S�}:: 6. ���� -- t ���... ..
:'��.. Y:-}.K�•�.•�p I}:>1:!-:'i}:�.-: .�•w'••.:.. •Y':: :S:'- :::q.'�JJJ•:•I �` V'!1-.:
cy,05.ar.r-.:a::s,:-t::x:::::.::.::S.'•::: ., � .-<-:.
`is•. ..xCv
•>:.. y ' ay.,!.�;.n.•.c�.� rL ::;_r3'o�ft/'.:!�.A��t.:::� '%:� >aC>.�+.:;.r.. .•moi::.:•::.i^�•: :y..:-2 ��i s ,,..., . .t_
j ., .Iw►.:,Rc'��+�.����.. `yrh:;.'` -:�-i. •t+c,.;•IEa: - -•r,,- ;.f.r. . _ f'::,fa::.....-i':ryy� 3 Sof':,.....
:9¢. a7/. r•!•i :•y`1 :C•:3• :•:�.•'::[•: r. -_. ••••`.....-: ;'s.,,, :-r:;:,c'• ."w r^ ..+n��•.�.�• ^�.�•p? .
y .Ji7 y '
www+.-•� .• MHO• ;qw
rn w w.
' N I r,� �;C �'_. UI{J�{ f.�Wu�� _ �f�D� ssmmrar► -
�ll i
ti
i a
t\ _— •
f.
• 1 � r
' � r
lu
0
�-
� ¢ ll SIU i
3
�l l�jl 1t
oM'tl t�ta�a• 1��/•�IpR• /ia1{taapw
Hh Nl. L+1 iRV
1
1
a Q �
u -
,IM - `, su•1
ui��'a { \ ��•
' M
1\ i I
.11111' { I •• '� {�.
1 11 1 �
1;11
,a 1
If
llln � ' • W Y � ,•II
Mt
• 111•
Mull F �'
O
iil�( I
11(1 I 7 1I 1io
an
It • tilt a �,
til C _ 1:f 11 atiltL
11 It i Iu m f
`MuI It
I !
1"1 1 I YI �i I 1 1
d. q',, i•Mli 1 dl IM�``I 41%
/+ 1%
at
A. C' I 111 a Il O l i I I'
li /a( ltll• ` IIT
M
(' 11.11 4111 �,1 'I
a I � � 1
a I ul L
Il li' r V
LL
all t 3■ <
a nj Inul: 1 0 A Y I
w i u I g�, iil rI
,� Ill L�U1J 11
Cj ,l4
0D0
I u
�-- ut
, I r
o. t
� 11
nl'
t
rl ;c. 1 11
Af-
dt
le, i
1 !8y q
y•' I
it I t
3 it( — I at
It
ca ' I
Y :a H ( act
4
,it 1 Ceti
:t: - e '
> - 1
( n RI 11 a
ad ul U
1
it It
I .
I t!
y e. «Q
It
I 7 6 uut fu rl
• I
q ll(l
«I `� Itt !
!I Ileee 1 I
Qtttl
IIaIdi
Ed
i ll(
i i i I 4 I to
I(kIr $ yO a at it i
fit
4l( a at((
IM `
i 4 111/1t
teteitug oi add
o+ II,Ite 117
iii v�'i 1I�1 �II• I/
cc
lege° , I Ed
(ell a 1•«t
to itt .i .
at
t,
a '•'
l
cc
u
�--T—
. i II
a
�J I IF Cl.r
(
draft �
P.C. Minutes
June 13 , 1990
Page 4.
Commr. Kourskis was against the motion because she felt it the use was ire
conflict with Broad Street raffic.
Commr. Schmidt was concerne with the long-term viability of this use at
the site due to the projec ions of increased traffic on Broad Street..
Commr. Billington suggests amending condition 2 to ensure screening of
evening lights from resid tial areas nearby.
The motion maker and seco d agreed with the amendment .
VOTING: AYES - Commrs. arleskint, Peterson, Billington, Schmidt, and
Hoff on.
NOES - Commr. ourikis.
ABSENT - Commr Gurnee.
The motion passed.
----------------------- ---- ---
Item 5. Public Hearing: Use Permit U 1463. Request to allow a new house
on a sensitive site; 367 Hill Street; R-1-S and C/OS-20 zones;
William and Beatrice Jeong, applicants. (Continued from December
13, 196.9) .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Smith presented the staff report and recommended approval_ of the
permit, subject to findings and conditions.
Commr. Schmidt felt condition 4 should be more complete regarding the
geological excavation and have professional supervision. involved.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing.
Rob Strong, 1 Buena Vista, applicant representative , concurred with the
staff report. He noted the ARC concerns were being addressed regarding
rooflines and scale, screening and landscaping, and using darker colors.
He felt the project was compatible with Hillside Development standards.
Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Schmidt felt the site was prominently seen throughout the community
and did not think the house was suitable for the location nor that the
hillside would support the large trees proposed on site.
Commr. Kerleskint felt the house was suitable for the site and followed
Hillside Development standards.
Commr. Billington agreed with Commr. Schmidt and was also concerned with
drainage and run -off, fire hazards on site, and potential for landslidir`
draft
P .C. Minutes
June 13, 1990
5.
Commr. Kourakis did not feel the project conformed with Hillside
Development standards.
Commr. Peterson agreed with Commr. Karleskint and favored approval . He
felt the applicant had adhered to the standards and guidelines.
Chairman Hoffman was concerned with the lack of first and second floor
stepping into the hill and preferred to see the design follow hillside
contours.
Commr. Kourakis moved to deny the request, as it did not conform to
Hillside Development standards and was too visually prominent, subject to
findings 1 through 3.
Commr. Schmidt seconded the motion.
VOTING:. AYES - Commrs. Kourakis, Schmidt, Billington, and Hoffman.
NOES - Commr. Karleskint and Schmidt .
ABSENT - Commr. Gurnee.
The motion passed.
Mr. Strong felt the procedure of closing the public hearing, holding
Tommission discussion and taking action without allowing the applicant to
)spond to subsequent Commission concerns was unfair ..
------------------------------------------ --------------------------------
Item 6. Public Hearing: General Plan A endment & Rezoning GP/PD 1455.
Consideration of amending the L nd Use Element Map and Zoning Map
to change the designations fro medium-high density residential,
historical preservation (R-3- to retail-commercial , historical
preservation, planned develop ant (C-C-H-PD) ; 1015 Nipomo Street ;
Michael and Mary Leitcher, a plicants. (Continued from September
13, 1989, January 10, March 4, and May 23, 1990) .
Judith Lautner presented the staff r port and discussed the changes in the
request since its previous presentation. She recommended the Commission
review the proposal and suggested a ternatives and recommend that Council
approve or deny the request.
Erwin Willis discussed the fire pr vention measures necessary to this site.
Commr. Karleskint noted that he oke with the applicant about the
restoration.
Commr. Kourakis was concerned w th losing residential facilities downtown.
C,
n alL,iNG_ n AGENDA
DA,E y ry ITEM # O
S
�. Y9
_ I
RECEIVE ®
AUG 3 1 1990
.9I. .
. L; rA
AGENDA AGEN� ,�-� JV.
C1 err ��"��' {TEM # � � CLn- 4
A.
Cil ,wz
y � �
,ttl000,70
• .a-s..e ��c.� ova' -��
= _ . F 7RECEIVE#.
AUG 3 1 1990
cm ear.
c>prrJs Lp r, ..
MEETIN AGENDA ,
GATE y-S'o ITEM #
August 14, 1990
City of San Luis Obispo
City Council
P.O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo , CA 93403
Dear Mayor Dunin and City Council Members:
RE: Property at 367 Hill Street
I willingly join with those others who ask for a favorable de-
cision for William and Beatrice Jeong granting approval for a
building permit at 367 Hill Street. San Luis Obispo.
There seems to be an almost inordinate number of "ifs-ands-buts"
accompanying the approval of this permit. The Jeongs are well
known residents and business persons of San Luis Obispo. They
both appreciate and are willing to abide by reasonable city
directives. I believe that because of their civic awareness
they are sensitive to the environmental and aesthetical concerns
of the city planning commission.
May William and Beatrice Jeong please be allowed to get on with
the construction of this house they so dearly wish to build?
Sincerely,
Brother Richard Moratto, FSC
Old Mission San Luis Obispo
751 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RECEIVED
AUG 3 1 1990
MEETING AGENDA /
ITEM #
Mr . & Mrs . Francis Gurney
2436 Johnson Avenue
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
August 6, 1990
City of' San Luis Obispo
City Council
P . 0 . Box 8100
San Luis Obispo , CA 93403
Mr. Mayor Dunin and City Council members,
Reference; Property at 367 Hill Street
We strongly urge you to grant approval for a building
permit to William & Beatrice Jeong at 367 Hill street, San
Luis Obispo. They have tried since 1988 to work with the
various agencies the City and have spent over $40,000.00 for
planning costs, on sight improvements and other requirements.
As long time residents, business and civic minded citizens of
this community, they should be given the opportunity to build
the home, they worked so hard for, on ,their property.
You need only inspect their 32 unit town-houses Por
Cal-Poly students at 60 Casa Street to see the quality of
home they would build . To deny them approval, after all their
efforts to comply, would be a great injustice .
Sincerely,
Francis D . Gurney
Paula C . Gurney
�. : RECEIVEP,
-_ Aur,
MEETING �, AGENDA
15 August 1990
Mayor Dunin and City .Councilmembers
CITY of SAN LUIS OBISPO
city Hall, 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Reference: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial, Use Permit U1463, New dwelling
on R-1-S site, 367 Hill Street, (Jeong/Strong).
Dear Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers,
The applicants in the referenced matter are well known to me—for decades! The
site, placement and design of the proposed dwelling has beoane well known by me.
BOTH the Jeongs and their hone proposed to be built at 367 Hill Street are geaiune
credits and enhancements to San Luis Obispo.
The Planning Cmmission's action to deny the Jeong's permit (13 June 1990) was
unfounded...and, to me, unconscionable! They had worked for almost two years with
the -ci.ty,• spent over 40 thousand dollars meeting various requirements and o=rtless
hours of concerted effort. To be denied without any evidence of any neighbor's or
.public's opposition AND without any opportunity to address commissioner's questions
is most unfair.
SOMETHING IS GRIEVOUSLY WRONG WITH ANY SYSTEM WEUCH PUNISHES PEOPLE AND
PETITIONS OF MERIT LIKE'TH &
You have the authority to correct this error made by the planning cca mission.
Please restore the Jeongs and their new hone to our oommunity. Approve their
Use Permit U1463.
Thank you for your personal attention and review of this matter.
Sincerely,
Ray Ball Kathleen Ball
770 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805)544-8588
RECEIVED
�C���y rK
./ TT., ';�ar;IP4UA
M�4hiNG AGENDA
DATE 9--_ ITEM # -�
O8-30-90
i
SLO City Council
C/o Ron Dunin vt 4
SLO City Hall
990 Palm St. , SLO S sirs
Re: William & Beatrice Jeong/367 Hill St. , SLO
Dear Mr. Dunin & Council Members,
I wish to express my deep concern about the recent
decision by the Planning Commission to reject the
Jeong ' s permit to build their residence at 367 Hill St.
They purchased this lot with the intent to build their
home some 3 years ago. They have tried to conform to
all of the cities demands during this time at great
expense to them.
The Jeong' s have never been told during this permit
process that they had a problem or that they may not
be able to build. NOW after all this, our city govern-
ment is backing off on issuing a permit without good
cause !
If this property is located in a sensitive area , why
this finding now? ! Other homes have been build recently
and if there was a problem, why allow lot splits in the
first place plus all the off-site improvements .
This matter does not make sense and I hope you will
reconsider and allow the Jeong' s to built their home.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Marcie Zu 4el
P. 0 Box 2391 ❑°j.:..c.z:: ,t_::, ^,i
Avila Beach, CA. 93424
595-7931
.i t.
IMELINa AGEjEf-A
8-30-90 eel
i D
SLO City Council
c/o Ron Dunin _
SLO City Hall / /F
990 Palm St. , SLO
Re : William & Beatrice Jeong/367 Hill St. , SLO
Dear Mr. Dunin S Council Members,
I wish to express my deep concern about the recent
decision by the Planning Commission to reject the
Jeong's permit to build their residence at 367 Hill St.
They purchased this lot with the intent to build their
home some 3 years ago. They have tried to conform to
all of the cities demands during this time at great
expense to them.
The Jeong's have never been told during this permit
process that they had a problem or that they may not
be able to build. NOW after all this, our city govern-
ment is backing off on issuing a permit without good
cause!
If this property is located in a sensitive area, why
this finding now? ! Other homes have been build recently
and if there was a problem, why allow lot splits in the
first place plus all the off-site improvements.
This matter does not make sense and I hope you will
reednsider and allow the Jeong' s to built their home.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Marcie Zu del
P. 0 Box 2391
Avila Beach, CA. 93424
595-7931
RECE1VCD
SEP 4: 1990
SAN LUIS Oaf EA
54 4 ( ter �I�: u— a:. i; .•, -. ... ' : 1.
D
4-A-P-�
(,�.ti.��_ ,�`,:�c.a...�L:- , Ccs 5 3 {�� � .=.' _�y=io_ .�% •. -F �...
�iu �.Z� c�t 3h
yz 3�, 7
I To-e4
RECElvtgD
SEP 4199U
9A*LtfnoRfSa7 Ca
MEETING AGENDA /
DATE ITEM #,
ILLI-f
(1,�,tJ ka-�.- I:.�-moi -t.C_lc��� �1+•J
Av
.� )L
RECEMED
SEP 41990
�f4o6 m
Se1p�Ah}Acbcofl Ca /
MEETING AGENDA
DATE
•J�/ G
01,
J� .GWIZL�I'lJ � Ga/ /✓72�t�J./C�L'��'G�'v�/v� _ _. .
i -
- - ----R EC-E t V V D.. .
SEP 41990