HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/04/1990, 3 - TRACT 2017: TENTATIVE MAP TO CREATE EIGHT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM LOTS AND ONE COMMON LOT, ON THE N �I MUING DATE:
������� City of San .ais osispo IT NUMBER:
WaMe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director (it,
PREPARED BY: Judith Lautner, Associate Planner /
SUBJECT: Tract 2017: Tentative map to c eate eight residential
condominium lots and one common lot, on the northerly side
of Dana Street, one lot west of the intersection with Nipomo
Street.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the tentative map, creating eight
residential condominium lots and one common lot.
BACKGROUND
Situation
The subdividers received approval of a general plan amendment and planned
development rezoning on December 6, 1988, to allow conversion of a
historical residence into an office, and construction of eight
residential condominiums at the rear. The residence has been converted
to offices and plans have been approved by the Architectural Review
Commission and submitted to the building division for the eight
residences. Now the subdividers want approval of the map creating eight
small residential condominium lots and one common lot. No change to the
design of the approved project is proposed. The Planning Commission
reviewed this request on August S. 1990, and recommended approval.
Data summary
i
Addresses: 550 Dana Street
Subdividers/property owners: Jim and Mary Deunow
Representative: CSD Engineering Inc (Dan Hutchinson)
Zoning: O-H-PD
General plan: Office
Environmental status: Negative declaration with mitigation granted
by the director May 11, 1989.
Project action deadline: September 22, 1990 (Subdivision Map Act PC
action deadline) ; February 3, 1991 (Permit
streamlining act deadline)
Site description
The site is 25, 043 square feet in area, and is the larger of two large
lots created from the original 57,477-square-foot lot that was the
subject of the planned development request. The lot is irregular in
shape, and slopes at two percent or less to the creek at the rear. The
site contains several trees of differing species and age, primarily
growing around the perimeter.
The site is bounded by the Reis Mortuary to the east, Stenner Creek at
the rear, a residence to the west, and residences across the street.
Proiect description description
�101 Ill0��Annl city of san lues OBISPO
IMMMe COUNCIL AGENOA REPORT
Tract 2017
550 Dana Street
Page 2
The subdividers want to create eight small lots and one common lot. The
small lots each are to contain one residence and a small yard area.
Driveways and front yards are to be part of the common lot, but are
restricted to exclusive use by residents. The project, while different
from an air-space development, is still legally considered a condominium
project.
EVALUATION
1. Open space and recreation facilities requirements. The project is in
a nonresidential zone. The city's condominium regulations say that
requirements for open space and recreational facilities in
nonresidential zones shall be set by the council at the time the
project is reviewed.
Dwellings are allowed in the Office zone, at a maximum density of.
twelve per acre. This density is the same as for the R-2 zone. Staff
therefore recommends the R-2 condominium development standards be
followed. The project has been evaluated in accordance with these
standards. The condominium regulations set minimum standards for
private, common, and total open space, and for recreation
facilities, for each of the residential zones.
a. Private open space. The condominium regulations require a
minimum of 250 square feet of "qualifying private open space" for
each unit in the R-2 zone. Qualifying private open space must
have a minimum dimension of ten feet in any direction for ground
level space, or six feet for a balcony or elevated deck, and must
be outside the street yard. Private open space must be directly
accessible to each unit.
The project provides open spacemeeting or exceeding the minimum
for each unit, except for unit E (lot 5) . The open space for
this unit, because of its angle to the creek easement line, does
not meet the six-foot minimum width for a raised deck. The
attached drawing shows the area that does not conform.
Alternatives considered by staff include moving the building
forward at an angle, which affects the driveway depth, moving it
into the creek easement area, which is not allowed, or adding a
private fenced area on the northeast side of the building, where
the proposed picnic area is. These alternatives appear less
acceptable than the proposal. Given that the non-conforming area
is small, and corresponding total open space for the project is
large, the proposed design appears acceptable.
b. Common open space. The condominium regulations do not have -
minimum common open space requirement for the R-2 zone. For t;
R-3 and R-4 zones a minimum of 100 square feet of common open
space per unit is required. Qualifying common open space is the
same as private open space, except that it needn't be directly
►�����i�Iflllll�;!� ��;Il city of san tuis oaispo
WaMs COUNCIL ACENOA REPORT
Tract 2017
550 Dana Street
Page 3
accessible to any unit.
The project provides about 500 square feet of common open space
per unit, if the creek public access and maintenance easement
area is not counted, or about 1, 025 square feet per unit if the
creek easement area is counted. The regulations are silent on
whether public access areas can be counted as common open space.
C. Total open space. The regulations require a minimum of 750
square feet of total open space for each unit in the R-2 zone.
Total open space is the combination of private and common open
space.
The project provides approximately 1,200 square feet of total
open space per unit, if the creek easement area is not counted,
or about 1, 600 square feet per unit if the easement area is
counted. In either case, the total open space requirement is
exceeded by a significant amount.
d. Common recreation facilities. Common recreation facilities are
required for the R-3 and R-4 zones only -a minimum of 20 square
feet per unit of common indoor recreation facilities, or 40
square feet of improved outdoor recreation facilities. The
project provides no common recreation facilities.
2. Storage. Each unit in a condominium must have at least 200 cubic feet
of enclosed, weatherproof and lockable private storage space, in
addition to cabinets and closets within the unit. The project
includes garages for each unit, that are wider than normal (24 ' wide) .
The additional area exceeds the minimum requirement for storage.
3. Laundry. Each unit must have a laundry area, or a common laundry
space must contain at least one washer and one dryer for each ten
units or fraction. The project provides washer and dryer areas within
the garage for each unit.
4. Energy conservation. Solar water heating is required for each unit,
and tenants may not be prohibited from installing clotheslines in
private open areas. Solar water heating will be provided.
5. Mitigation measures. A negative declaration of environmental impact,
with mitigation, was approved by the council when the planned
development rezoning was approved. Mitigation measures have already
been met, or are being required as part of building permit review.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the tentative map, creating eight small lots
and one large common lot.
J-3
°1010111�11°mj l flIU city of San WIS OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Tract 2017
550 Dana Street
Page 4
Attached:
Draft resolutions
Vicinity map
Environmental initial study
Plan showing Unit E open space
Tentative Tract Map
3.
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT 2017,
CREATING EIGHT SMALL LOTS AND ONE COMMON LOT,
ON DANA STREET, NEAR ITS INTERSECTION WITH NIPOMO STREET
(TR 2017) .
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 TR 2017,
the Planning Commission's action, staff recommendations and reports
thereon, makes the following findings:
1. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements
will not adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare
of persons living or working in the vicinity.
2. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements
are consistent with the general plan.
3 . The design of the tentative map 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 property within) the proposed subdivision.
5. The Community Development Director has determined that the
proposed subdivision will not have a significant effect on
the environment and has granted a negative declaration,
with mitigation.
6. Compliance with the private open space standard for unit
E (lot 5) would not be practical because of the location
and site design.
7. An exception to allow a portion of the private open space
for unit E (lot 5) to be narrower than the standards
require will not constitute a grant of special privilege.
8. No feasible alternative to authorizing the exception to
private open space width for unit E (lot 5) would satisfy
the intent of city policies and regulations.
leoJ06 06
Resolution no. (1990 Series)
Page 2
SECTION 2 . The tentative map for Tract 2017 is approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. The subdivider shall submit a final map to the city for
review, approval, and recordation.
2. No occupancy shall be granted prior to recordation of the
final map, or the condominium conversion process must be
followed.
3 . The subdivider shall prepare conditions, covenants, and
restrictions (CC&R's) to be approved by the City Attorney
and Community Development Director prior to final map
approval. The CC&R's shall contain the following
provisions:
a. Creation of a homeowners' association to enforce
the CC&R's and provide for professional, perpetual
maintenance of all common areas including private
driveways, utilities, drainage, parking lot area,
walls and fences, lighting, laundry facilities, and
landscaping in a first class condition.
b. Grant to the city the right to maintain common area
if the homeowners ' association fails to perform,
and to assess the homeowners' association for
expenses incurred and the right of the city to
inspect the site at mutually agreed times to assure
conditions of CC&R's and final map are met.
C. No parking except in approved, designated areas.
d. Grant to the city the right to tow away vehicles
on a complaint basis which are parked in
unauthorized places.
e. Prohibition of storage or other uses which would
conflict with the use of garages and uncovered
parking spaces for parking purposes.
f. No outdoor storage of boats, campers, motorhomes,
or trailers nor long-term storage of inoperable
vehicles.
g. No outdoor storage by individual units except in
designated storage areas.
h. No change in cit l
g city-required provisions of the CC&R s ,
without prior City Council approval.
Resolution no. (1990 Series)
Page 3
i. Homeowners' association shall file with the City
Clerk the names and addresses of all officers of
the homeowners' association within 15 days of any
change in officers of the association.
4. Lot 9 (common lot) shall contain a blanket public utilities
easement and creek access easement, to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
5. The easterly driveway shall be widened to 201 , to the
satisfaction of the Fire Department.
6. An exception to the private open space width requirement
for lot 5 is hereby granted.
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
ATTEST:
City Clerk
3-7
Resolution no. (1990 Series)
Page 4
APPROVED:
tyAdm'nistrative Officer
t7orny 17
ioma
Community Dev pment Director
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT 2017,
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DANA STREET, .NEAR .NIPOMO STREET
(TRACT 2017)
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
2017, the Planning Commission's recommendation, staff
recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following finding:
1. The design of the tentative map and the proposed
improvements are not consistent with the condominium regulations.
� denied. SECTION 2. The tentative map for Tract 2017 is hereby,
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.
C
�-9
Resolution no. (1990 Series)
Tract 2017
Page 2
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Administrative Officer
Ciy to ney .�
Community Deve went Director
Nowo 00
ir / �1
sus � 1 J
'o
A
6:
e � i E�54tihO
O IO
P J
'Rc i
' � e�
4Gtirl5 Y aieo�' !� p`��O t�d s i
O�z i
O• P D
Rol-
.00
1'=100'
tall•
aw� o C
g
ti{• , „ti
city of San IDIS OBISPO �
1, 11111
�® INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION � D/g/y� Sl APPLICATION NO. 14-RR)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION. �E 7'� J11 p4l'u t4 Ha DN6V113 APUD p44�Aop z7/EtoPNt;Ct/
4M05Sr io .4i�nuJ .4 �v�/161IJ4r7og) 4L o ries m �h7wL
CoAzef miluNS /7iU .4 C'2yj"y S F) _smr-
APPLICANT J/M DI�U�tr 1
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
.NEGATIVE DECLARATION Xo' MITIGATION INCLUDED
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED o�
PREPARED BY �� �l� IT�f' L f+1JT7V�� DATES�Ofg X
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
L DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
IL POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS..................................................• IUOAj "Ir
IL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH.......................................... A )O AJ r
C. LAND USE ............................................................_............ No/UG -K
O. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ......................................... A)t--7 A)r--7,7t'
E PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................ O
F. UTILITIES.............................................................:.......... /U 0 A)
• G. NOISELEVELS .............................................6..................... /UO AA5
K GEOLOGIC A SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... ✓V o
L AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS.....:......................................... /JC/16—
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY .............................................. A/O Aj
KPLANT LIFE_.....................:.............................._................ JVo
LANIMAL LIFE.............:.............._...._.......................,......_.....
K ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL................................................... Y(1 O AJF*
N. AESTHETIC ....................................................................... �U 6&Je- C
O. ENERGWRESOURCE USE .........................................................
P. OTHER ..........................................................................
HL STAFF RECOMMENDATION
CnA7 Nq-- f��C�iY 1G/�, �, rr4 .,All ri A-T70
ljt
'SEE ATTACHED REPORT !e es
l
ER 14-88
Page 2
1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The applicant wants to change the general plan land use map designation and obtain
approval of a planned development request for a combination office and residential
project on Dana Street. The lot is 59,477 square feet in area, and slopes at two
percent or less to the creek at the rear. A 4350-square-Coot residence exists at the
front of the site. The remainder of the site contains several trees of various types
and diameters, a garage and a shed.
The project is further defined by a written description and plans, which are included
in this description by reference.
II POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW
A. Community Plansng d Goals
General Plan Housing Elcmcn .
° Goals are the basis for politics and implementation programs. The following
housing element goals relate to this project:
Goal no. 4: Maintenance of a stock of housing types to meet the needs of
renters and buyers at all income levels;
Goal no. 6: Variety .in the location, tenure, cost, style, and age of dwellings
to accomodate the wide range of households desiring to live within the city;
Proiect or000sal: The proposal would change the density allowed on the site .
from eighteen units per net acre to twelve. In addition, one large dwelling on
a large lot would be taken out of the housing stock and converted to offices.
Possible conflict: Land value is usually based on its potential in numbers of
dwellings. Fewer units on a site intended for medium-high density development
usually means a higher land cost per unit, which may translate to high per-unit
cost for the buyer. Higher land costs may limit the type of buyers to those
with above-moderate income.
In this case, the land has been under the same ownership for several years. As
the property owner has been living at the site, property taxes have remained
stable. The land may be valued at a higher price than was initially paid for
it, but this value should not affect the development costs of the project,
except advantageously. The owner's decision to develop fewer units on the site
than are allowed may be based in part on the lower land costs involved.
As noted in the housing element (page 24), "buying power of households with
moderate or higher income will continue to set upper and lower limits to housing
costs, regardless of city actions.' In other words, the ultimate cost of the
units is likely to be based more on market demand than on development costs.
3-/3
ER 14-88
Page 4
Proiect proposal: The project includes remodelling the existing historical structure
into offices, and building new residential units in the rear. No changes to the
exterior of the existing building,arc proposed at this time. The schematic views of
the new buildings indicates a conscious attempt to integrate features of the existing
building into the new. Architectural review will be required if the project goes
forward. Review and recommendation to the ARC will also be made by the Cultural
Heritage Committee. This review process is adequate to assure that Historical
Preservation Guidelines are being met.
Mitigation measures: None required.
C. Land =
The request is for a change in the land use pattern for the site. A portion of the
site, currently used for a residence, would be changed to office. The change would
not introduce a new use to thearea, as the site is adjacent to an office zone. No
significant changes to the present or planned land use of the, area are anticipated as
a result of this request.
D. Transportationng_d circulation
Automobile trips to and from the site will increase as a result of this project.
Currently, one residence exists on the site. According to the Institute of Traffic !�
Engineers' Trio Generation, residents of single-family homes average ten trip ends
per day ("trip ends' includes trips starting and ending at the residence). Residents
of attached condominiums average 5.9 vehicle trips per day. The number of trips to
and from the site generated by the residential use is therefore expected to increase
by:
11X5.9 = 64.9 65 - 10 = trips per day.
Average daily trip ends for a 4350-square-foot office building is 100. The total
number of trips per day expected to result from this project, then, is
65 + 100 - IM5 trips per day, or 155 more than the current number.
The city's traffic engineer says that Dana Street can accomodate this increase
without reaching "unacceptable' levels of traffic.
A significant problem for Dana Street residents at this time is the use of the street
for parking. Because of its nearness to downtown, shoppers and workers tend to park
on Dana Street for long periods of time.
Proiect proposal: The project would provide parking spaces for the new residences as
well as for the office use, in accordance with city requirements. Currently, there
is a garage and driveway available for the single residence. The project is not
expected to increase demand for on-street parking in the neighborhood. Because
office workers normally leave at night, there may be a surplus of spaces on-site in
the evenings.
i
ER 14-88
Page 3
C The site's nearness to downtown and attractive setting (including the creek)
tend to add to its desirability as housing for young, government-center-oriented
professionals. Without subsidies, the project could not accomodate low-income
homebuyers.
Conclusion: The lowered density will not have a significant adverse effect on
the cost of the units. The project, because of its location and natural
amenities, will attract moderate- and above-moderate-income buyers.
Mitigation measures: None required. The project will add to the housing stock
for moderate and above-moderate income residents.
• Implementation programs in the housing element are intended to carry out the
goals and policies. Implementation program no. 16 (page 46) says, "Changes from
residential to non-residential land-use designations will be minimized"
Proiect proposal: The proposal includes changing the land-use designations from
Medium-high-density Residential to Office.
Possibleneo flict: The program calls for the Planning Commission and City
Council to deny the majority of requests for changes from residential
designations to commercial. Approval of this request may conflict with this
program, which implements goals to preserve existing housing stock and supply of
residentially-zoned land.
Mitigation measure: If the council finds the conflict is significant, then it
must deny the request, finding the proposal inconsistent with the city's general
plan. The City Council may, however, determine the change in this case is
insignificant. finding that the majority of the site will remain residential.
Condominium development pnd conversion standards: The Condominium Development and
Conversion regulations contain standards for development of residential
condominiums. The proposed project appears to meet all of these standards. If the
change in land-use designation is approved, the applicant will be required to file a
tract map application to divide the site into condominium spaces. The review of the
tract map materials will include a detailed check that the project meets the required
standards.
Mitigation measures: None required.
Historical Preservation Guidelines: The project site is in one of the city's three.
"historical preservation districts", and the existing residence is listed on the
city's lists of "historical resources", rated as "potentially eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places". The city has adopted Historical Preservation
Program Guidelines to guide the use of property designated historically significant
to the city. The guidelines say that "changes to the outside of a historic building
should further promote its original architectural style:and character", and that
"(n)cw primary structures within Historical Preservation Districts should further
promote the historic character of those areas--All new buildings need not be
designed in the same style of surrounding structures. However, elements of these
styles and building forms should be included in the new structure and it should
C complement the architectural character of the area'
3-4500
ER 14-88 1
Page 5
Mitigation measures: None required.
F. Utilities
Water supply: Under current conditions, development of additional area in the city
could jeopardize adequate water service for existing city customers and the area to
be developed.
Safe annual yield is the amount of water which can be withdrawn from reservoirs year
after year, without running out of water during a drought like that which has been
experienced since the reservoirs have been in use. The safe annual yield from
existing city sources is 8,180 acrc=feet per year. Total city water use in 1987 was
8,700 acre-feet. Estimated 1988 use is 8,650 acre-feet (106 percent of safe yield),
considering recently completed projects and those expected to be completed soon. As
water use increases above safe yield, cut-backs from usual water use will be needed
more often and they will have to be more substantial to avoid running out of water.
The City Council is considering development controls to prevent water use from
exceeding 100 to 110 percent of safe yield. While the city is exploring several
supplemental sources of water, no significant new supplies have been programmed to be
available in the next one to two years. Supplemental water sources which would allow
full development within the existing urban reserve line arc expected to be available
seven to ten years from now, at the earliest.
i
The proposed development would use about three acrc-feet per year. Of this, 100
percent would be from city water sources. This project would use about .037 percent
of safe yield.
The applicant proposes that the development incorporate the following water-saving
features:
1. Drought-resistant landscaping over the majority of the site
2. Drip irrigation and other water-saving irrigation techniques where
applicable
3. Installation of low-flow showcrheadsand faucets and water-saving toilets
in the new units, retrofitting of the existing residence with water-saving
plumbing devices.
Mitigation measures: Staff is recommending that the applicant also investigate and
install cisterns to collect roof drainage for summer irrigation, if available and
feasible for this project.
Installation of all of the above devices may lower the water use for the project
significantly.
ER 14-88
Page 6
J. Surface water flow and ounlity
A creek runs along the rear property line. The creek is heavily vegetated and about
fifteen to twenty feet deep. Several trees line its banks. The proposed buildings are
set back a minimum of 20' from the top of bank, while two parking spaces are as close as
eight feet from the bank.
While overgrown, this section of the creek is attractive and an asset to the property.
Major concerns with development along creeks arc with the effect on wildlife (discussed
below) and pollution of the water. Creeks must also be kept free of debris, silt, and
flow-restricting vegetation.
The city's flood control regulations require dedication of an access and maintenance
easement over all creek areas. as a condition of further site development. This easement
will allow city crews to enter the property and clear brush as necessary to keep the
creek flowing. This work helps prevent flooding and minimizes standing water, thereby
discouraging mosquito infestation. Such an casement will be required of any development
on this property.
Preventing trash and oil from entering the creek is a more difficult problem. Persons
living in developments that focus on the creek as an asset are less likely to use the
creek as a dumpster. When residents can enjoy the sight and sounds of a creek, they will
�. normally keep it clear of trash. The proposed layout of the buildings and landscaping
proposal have been designed to allow visual and physical access to the creek for all
residents of the project. Therefore, littering of the creek is not expected to be a
problem in this case.
There are several ways to handle oil and gas pollution, siltation, and erosion. The
parking spaces may need to be moved to allow for creek improvements to handle the
drainage expected from the project. Installation of oil separators may be adequate to
minimize oil and gas pollution of the creek. Alternatively, drainage may be directed
away from.the creek, although significant grading would be necessary to alter its natural
course. A small siltation and detention basin next to the top of the creek bank could
slow water entering the creek, thereby limiting erosion and siltation.
A hydraulic study has not been completed, as the design of the project may change during
the review process. Once a preliminary plan is approved, the applicant can analyse the
effects of the project on the creek and design biologically sound methods to handle
drainage. Staff does not anticipate significant site planning changes to result from a
hydraulic analysis.
Any proposals for work in the creek will require review for conformance with city
standards, as well as permits from the Department of Fish and Game (DFG).
Mitieation measures: The applicant must submit a creek improvement plan that includes
methods for control of erosion, siltation, and pollution of the creek bed as part of
grading and drainage proposals for the precise development plan.
J-17
ER 14-88
Page 7 —�
K., L. Plantn animal JiLft.
The majority of wildlife to be protected in this case is that associated with the creek.
The major plant species to be conserved are the large, healthy trees on the site.
Animal iLft; .Since the early I800's, 95% of California's natural riparian habitat has
been destroyed. It is becoming increasingly important to conserve what remains. In
general, minimal disturbance of existing creek communities is the preferred protection
method. Where those communities have been disturbed or are threatened, measures to
enhance or protect that environment may be necessary.
In this case, the riparian habitat appears healthy. The Department of Fish and Game is
charged with the protection of wildlife in areas within its purview, including creeks.
Any work proposed within the creek (none is currently proposed) must be reviewed by DFG
biologists. Permits from the DFG arc required for all work within creeks.
Mitigation measures: None required. Current permit procedures are adequate to protect
animal life in this area.
Plan lid Several trees of various species exist on the site. The applicant plans to
retain the larger, more significant specimens. Several of the small fruit trees are
proposed to be removed. All trees must be numbered by stakes, and listed on a tree list
for review by the city arborist. The list must indicate whether the trees are to stay or
arc to be removed. The city arborist will then review the trees in the field, and
approve appropriate tree removals.
Replacement trees may be required to be planted, depending on the value of the trees to
be removed.
Mitigation measure: The applicant must submit a tree plan and list, and number all trees
correspondingly out in the field, to the approval of the city arborist. The arborist
will determine which trees may be removed, which need to be safety-pruned, and what
replacement trees must be planted..
M. Archaelogical/historical
Please refer to discussion under COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS - "Historical preservation
guidelines", above.
Because of its nearness to the Mission, the site may have a history older than the
existing buildings indicate. Excavation for foundations may unearth relics with
archeological significance.
Mitigation measure: Prior to developing the site, a qualified archaeological historian
shall review available records and determine if an archaelogical evaluation is
warranted. If a survey is warranted, survey results and appropriate mitigation measures
must be submitted to the Community Development Director, who will determine the
appropriate action to be taken.
J1
�l8
1
-JI
j ER 14-88
C Page 8
N. Esthetic to
The existing building has been determined to be historically significant. The new
buildings and grounds must not detract from the value of this building. The size and
massing of the structures and the layout of the parking and landscaping will be reviewed
by both the CHC and the ARC to assure compatibility.
Mitieation measures: None required.
thcr
Cumulative impacts: The change of the land use designation of this site from
residential to office may be determined to be insignificant by itself, but
significant from.a cumulative standpoint. Office-designated areas traditionally
exist next to residential zones, as low-impact "buffers" from more intense commercial
activity. When additional officc-designated areas are needed, developers are more
likely to find residentially-zoned land more attractive for this use than commercial
land, which has a higher land cost. If several changes from residential to office
designations are made, the impact on total residential land in the city could be
considcrable.
The city sponsored an office study in 1986.. The conclusions of that study were that
there will be a need for additional offices particularly above 2500 square feet in
area by 1995. Smaller offices arc either available now or will be, through
conversion of residences in officc zones, within a few years. There is little
evidence at this time that residential land, containing small lots developed with
single-family homes, is currently or potentially threatened.
RECOMMENDATION
Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the following mitigation
measures:
1. The Planning Commission and City Council must determine the change in this case is
insignificant, finding that the majority of the property will remain residential.
2. The applicant must investigate and install cisterns to collect roof drainage for
summer irrigation, if available and feasible for this project.
3. The applicant must submit a creek improvement plan that includes methods for control
of erosion, siltation, and pollution of the creek bed as parr of grading and drainage
proposals for the precise development plan.
4. The applicant must submit a tree plan and list, and number all trees correspondingly
out in the field, to the approval of the city arborist. The arborist will determine
which trees may be removed, which need to be safety-pruned. and what replacement
trees must be planted.
ER 14-88
Page 9
5. Prior to developing the site, a qualified archaeological historian shall review
available records and determine if an archaclogical evaluation is warranted. If a
survey is warranted, survey results and appropriate mitigation measures must be
submitted to the Community Development Director, who will determine the appropriate
action to be taken.
1 i _
I
e
\- CD • i?+i vi
n �
cr
r
n
r
-V .A
0
Ch
0
PO
Q
Im
A
7r
Cyn
ly • 1
`` w {
� ` w .-C... a �� •.
f
• ! P
� � N J ♦ NI �,�
CD m _ it
Z $$
C $ zvo N mp con to
P .I
rn
Ca —o
G
a -1 --4n � � -
s D A N A S T