HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-2019 Item 08 - Public Hearing: 1121 Montalban Appeals
Department Name: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: October 1, 2019
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 60 minutes
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: 1) REVIEW OF APPEAL (FILED BY DAMIEN MAVIS; APPLICANT) OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE A
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITH THE MODIFIED CONDITIONS
RESTRICTING ACCESS TO BEDROOMS TO A SINGLE DOOR RATHER
THAN THE PROPOSED DOUBLE DOORS (APPL-0393-2019).
2) REVIEW OF AN ADDITIONAL APPEAL (FILED BY DAVID JOY,
APPELLANT) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO
APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITH THE BEDROOM
CONFIGURATION AS PROPOSED (APPL-0394-2019).
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution:
1. Upholding the appeal by the Applicant to remove Resolution No. PC-1003-2019 Condition
No. 3, which was added by the Planning Commission upon its approval of the project to
restrict access to bedrooms to a single door rather than the proposed double doors; and
2. Denying the appeal of the Appellant, thereby granting final approval of the project based on
findings of consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations and applicable City
Standards. (Attachment A).
REPORT IN BREIF
A planning application has been submitted for consideration of a new three-story, mixed-use
development consisting of 15 residential units (including three very-low income affordable units)
and 430 square feet of commercial space. The Planning Commission (PC) approved the
development project on May 8, 2019, with added conditions of approval. On May 20, 20191, the
PC approval was appealed by Damien Mavis (applicant), as well as a separate appeal filed by the
neighbor David Joy (appellant) related to the PC’s newly imposed conditions.
The appeal filed by the applicant relates to a condition of approval intended to prevent the use of
double doors within the units, and the appeal filed by the appellant relates to concerns regarding
the proposed privacy screens in the bedrooms. The staff recommendation is to uphold the
applicant’s appeal and to deny the second appeal based on consistency with the Uniform
1 Municipal Code Section 1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal. The appellant shall file a notice of appeal
with the City Clerk within ten calendar days…In the event the last day of the filing period falls on a nonbusiness
day, the appeal period shall be extended to include the next business day.
Packet Page 125
Item 8
Building Code, General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Housing Accountability Act, and the Density
Bonus Law.
The PC’s condition of approval that is the subject of the applicant’s appeal is intended to prevent
independent entry and use of both sides of the room while the privacy screen is in use. The
condition was imposed in response to concerns related to ‘overcrowding’ within the proposed
bedrooms, with the assumption that these features would increase the occupancy of the units
resulting in impacts such as parking. However, the authority on occupancy is an area of
regulation occupied by the Building Code; there is case law suggesting that a City cannot
establish more restrictive standards for regulating occupancy than provided in the building codes
(Attachment B). Fundamentally, privacy screens are an amenity for residents and do not
constitute “walls” as defined by the building code that would result in the creation of separate
bedrooms.
The discussion around privacy screens is important as it relates to the Density Bonus Law
(DBL). Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1) mandates that “in no case may a city…apply any development
standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development
meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives
permitted by this [the DBL].” The desire to consider an individual room with a privacy screen as
effectively two rooms would not actually reduce the allowable occupancy of the rooms within
the building, but would have the result of requiring more parking and an overall reduction in the
number of units that could be constructed under City density standards2, which are both
outcomes that the DBL seeks to avoid.
The scope of this report is to provide an evaluation of the project in terms of its consistency with
the City’s General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City policies and standards.
Consistency with State codes is also evaluated due to protections provided by the DBL and
Housing Accountability Act. The Council is being asked to review the proposed project in
consideration of the appeals; however, the review is considered de novo3 and Council is not
limited to acting on the items brought up in each appeal.
Based on the analysis set forth below, staff is recommending the Council uphold the appeal filed
by the applicant and deny the appeal filed by the appellant, thereby modifying the PC’s approval
of the project. While the condition at issue does not directly regulate density, if the Council
reduces the project’s density or adds conditions to the project that may be argued to have the
effect of reducing the project’s density, then special findings are required by State law and staff
will return at a subsequent meeting with conditions tailored to the input and direction of Council
following the appeal hearing. The following discussion provides additional background and
analysis of the proposed project, and the appeals.
2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.70.040.A.1 Density Calculation – General: In the AG, C/OS, R-1 zones, each
single-unit dwelling counts as one density unit. In the other zones, different size dwellings have density unit values
as follows: a.) Studio and one-bedroom dwellings less than 600 square feet = 0.50 unit; b.) One-bedroom dwellings
between 601 and 1,000 square feet = 0.66 unit; c.) Two-bedroom dwelling = 1.00 unit; d.) Three-bedroom dwelling
= 1.50 units; e.) Dwelling with four or more bedrooms = 2.00 units.
3 “De novo” means to be heard “a new”. The Council can act as if it were considering the project for the first time,
affording no deference to the either CHC or ARC decisions. The Council should apply federal, state, and local
policies in effect to the permit decision pending before Council.
Packet Page 126
Item 8
SITE DATA
The project site is located in the Tourist Commercial (C-T) zone and takes access from mid-
block of Montalban Street between Santa Rosa and Lemon Streets. Surrounding uses include
single-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings, general retail, service station, and restaurants.
Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required*
Front Setback 10 feet 10 feet
Density (units/acre) 9 (97.5% Bonus) 4.08
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.8 2.5
Maximum Height of Structures 39 feet 45 feet
Max Building Coverage 50% 75%
Total # Parking Spaces
Electric Vehicle Parking
Bicycle Parking
19 (6 compact)
3 EV Ready
34
19
2 EV Ready
34
*2018 Zoning Regulations
DISCUSSION
A planning application for consideration of a new three-story, mixed-use development consisting
of 15 residential units (including 3 very low-income affordable units) and 430 square feet of
commercial space was submitted by Damien Mavis on December 14, 2018. The application
included a request for two affordable housing alternative incentives (§ 17.140.070) for a 97.5
percent density bonus and relief of site development standards to allow ground floor residences
within the first 50 feet of floor area adjacent to the street. The project site is located within the
Tourist Commercial (C-T) zone and surrounding development includes residential and
commercial uses. The purpose of the C-T Zone is to provide accommodations and services for
the traveling public that provide low-impact visitor activities; and the mixed-use development
provides commercial space that may be utilized by uses appropriate for the C-T zone.
Following review by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on April 1, 2019, the PC
approved the project on May 8, 2019, with added conditions of approval to address double door
Applicant Chris Baranek
Representative Thom Jess, Arris Studio
Architects
Zoning C-T (Tourist Commercial)
General Plan Tourist Commercial
Site Area ~15,000 square feet.
Environmental
Status
Categorically exempt from
environmental review under
CEQA Guidelines § 15332
(In-Fill Development Projects)
Packet Page 127
Item 8
access to the bedrooms. On May 20, 20194, both the applicant and appellant filed separate
appeals related to the PC’s newly imposed conditions.
Background
The applicant initially submitted the Planning Application for the project on December 14, 2018.
The entitlements for this project are twofold: (1) design review; and (2) affordable housing
incentive request for two alternative incentives including a 97.5 percent density bonus and a
reduction in site development standards to allow ground floor residences within the first 50 feet
of floor area adjacent to the street, where this area is normally reserved for non-residential uses
(Attachment C).
Previous Advisory Body Action
Architectural Review Commission. On April 1, 2019 the ARC reviewed the proposed project for
consistency with the Community Design Guidelines. The ARC recommended approval of the
project and included seven directional items to address specific concerns related to building and
site design (Attachment D). The ARC did not vote to include these directional items as
recommended conditions of approval, rather only for consideration to staff and the applicant to
address.
Planning Commission. On May 8, 2019, the PC reviewed the proposed project for consistency
with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and applicable City development standards and
guidelines. The PC approved both entitlements and, in the process, removed one condition of
approval and added four new conditions (Attachment E).
Appeal Summary
The following information details the appeals of the PC’s decision to approve the project and
modify the conditions of approval and provides staff’s response to the reasons for the appeals.
Appeal #1 (Damien Mavis, Applicant): On May 20, 2019, the applicant filed an appeal of
Condition No. 3 of the PC Resolution, which was added during the meeting, after the public
comment period had closed, to restrict access to bedrooms to a single door rather than the
proposed double doors (Attachment F). The appellant’s stated reason for the appeal of Condition
No. 3 is that it holds this project to a different standard than other projects that have been
recently approved and eliminates the practical use of the proposed bedroom privacy screens.
Staff Analysis: Following the ARC hearing, staff prepared a draft Resolution, which was
presented as Attachment 1 to the PC Agenda Report and incorporated several of the ARC
directional items as conditions, including a condition that would require the removal of th e
applicant’s proposed bedroom partitions. Upon staff’s further review of the proposed condition
of approval, and prior to the PC hearing, staff released the Bedroom Partition Memo with a
revised draft resolution eliminating the proposed condition. This memo was provided to explain
that this condition was inconsistent with the Uniform Housing Code and the Density Bonus Law.
At the PC hearing, the Commission presented a new Condition No. 3 in response to the
4 Municipal Code Section 1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal. The appellant shall file a notice of appeal
with the City Clerk within ten calendar days…In the event the last day of the filing period falls on a nonbusiness
day, the appeal period shall be extended to include the next business day…
Packet Page 128
Item 8
elimination of the previous condition to remove the partitions, which stated the following:
“Plans submitted for a building permit shall be restricted to a single door egress from
bedrooms rather than the proposed double door, subject to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.”
The intent of the PC’s new condition was to address concerns for the potential conversion of
additional bedrooms to prevent ‘overcrowding’ (i.e. two-bedroom unit converted to a four-
bedroom unit). Staff’s recommendation continues to be that the new condition of approval to
eliminate the double doors is inconsistent with the Uniform Housing Code and the Density
Bonus Law. This analysis has previously been applied to other residential mixed-use projects
with double-door access to bedrooms and privacy screens. When similar concerns were recently
raised (City Council review of the 71 Palomar, 22 Chorro and 790 Foothill projects), City staff
advised against conditions related to these floor plan features if they would have the effect of
reducing the number of dwelling units that could be provided within the project.
The discussion around privacy screens and double doors is important as it relates to the DBL.
Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1) mandates that “in no case may a city…apply any development standard
that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the
criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this
[the DBL].” The desire to consider an individual room with a privacy screen as effectively two
rooms would not actually reduce the allowable occupancy of the rooms within the building, but
would have the result of requiring more parking and an overall reduction in the number of units
that could be constructed under City density standards, which are both outcomes that the DBL
seeks to avoid.
Accordingly, Council may only lawfully deny the project or reduce its density if it determines
the project or the additional density causes a specific adverse health or safety impact. Standards
such as “compatibility” can be lawfully used to impose design conditions but cannot be used to
deny a housing project or reduce density. The reason is because the standard of compatibility is
subjective in nature and not necessarily related to public health and safety. The Housing
Accountability Act (HAA) requires the specific adverse impact be based on objective health and
safety standards. Also, even if the City identifies a specific adverse impact, the City has the
obligation to prove that “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the
adverse impact… other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval
of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.” Government Code §
65589.5(j)(1)(B). Therefore, Staff recommends upholding the applicant’s appeal to eliminate
Condition No. 3 of the Resolution, thereby granting approval of the project as otherwise
conditioned.
Appeal #2 (David Joy, Appellant): On May 20, 2019, the appellant filed an appeal of the PC’s
decision to eliminate the condition to remove the bedroom partitions, and counter the applicant’s
appeal to remove the condition restricting access to the bedrooms to a single door (Attachment
G). Reasons for the appeal state that the applicant’s intent is to bypass the regulations to
superficially add additional bedrooms, which is considered a negative impact on the
neighborhood as it relates to parking demand. The appeal also cites Section 17.185.008.B which
Packet Page 129
Item 8
defines a bedroom5 and states that it is the Director’s discretion to determine if spaces that do not
clearly meet the definition of a “bedroom” meet the intent of this regulation.
Staff Analysis: As discussed in the Bedroom Partition Memo, the partitions that are used as
privacy screens and the double-doors in the proposed project do not constitute walls or egress
that create additional bedrooms in the project. The partitions and double-doors do not increase
the otherwise allowable occupancy or the number of bedrooms in the project under the Zoning
Regulations or Building Code, and do not result in additional parking requirements or parking
demand for the property when compared to how the property could be legally occupied without
the partitions in place.
The Community Development Director has reviewed the layout of the dwelling units and has
determined that the partitions and double doors as designed are not intended to increase the
number of bedrooms per unit, but rather are provided as an important amenity that is preferred
by the intended occupants of the housing project. Because the proposed partitions do not qualify
as additional bedrooms under the California Building Code, or the City’s Zoning Regulations,
the Community Development Department supports their inclusion as an important housing
amenity. The condition added by the Planning Commission was intended to address concerns
related to ‘overcrowding’ within the bedrooms, which is an area of regulation occupied by the
Building Code. As discussed in the attached Bedroom Partition Memo, a City cannot establish
more restrictive standards for regulating occupancy than provided in the building codes. As a
result of this analysis, staff recommends denying the appellants appeal, thereby granting
approval of the project.
Policy Context
The Housing and Land Use Elements encourage mixed-use projects where they can be found to
be compatible with existing and potential future development. The Land Use Element (LUE)
encourages compatible mixed uses in commercial districts (LUE Policy 3.8.5) and specifically
discusses residential and commercial mixed use (LUE Policy 2.3.6)6. The Housing Element (HE)
provides policies and programs that speak specifically to supporting affordable housing projects
where appropriate (HE Goals 2, 4, & 6).
The HE provides policies and programs that speak specifically to supporting affordable housing
projects and increasing density bonuses above state allowances where appropriate (Goals 2, 4, &
6). Granting a density bonus in excess of State allowances (97.5% Density Bonus, where
normally permitted at 35%) and allowing a reduction in site development standards to allow
ground floor residences within the first 50 feet of floor area adjacent to the street, are
recommended actions that are consistent with LUE and HE programs and policies related to
student housing, special needs housing, and affordable housing for very-low income
5 Zoning Regulations Section 17.185.008.B: Bedroom. Any space in a dwelling unit which contains a minimum of
70 square feet of floor area unless it is one of the below listed rooms or common spaces… The Director shall
determine whether spaces which do not clearly meet the definition of a “bedroom” meet the intent of this regulation
or need to be forwarded to the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit review.
6 LUE Policy 2.3.6. The City shall encourage mixed use projects, where appropriate and compatible with existing
and planned development on the site and with adjacent and nearby properties. The City shall support the location of
mixed use projects and community and neighborhood commercial centers near major activity nodes and
transportation corridors / transit opportunities where appropriate.
Packet Page 130
Item 8
households7.
Housing was determined to be one of Council’s priority goals for the City to accomplish over the
2019-21 financial plan. The goal states: Facilitate increased production of all housing types
designed to be economically accessible to the area workforce and low and very low-income
residents, through increased density and proximity to transportation corridors in alignment with
the Climate Action Plan.
The HAA and DBL provide several provisions related to “housing projects” regarding the City’s
authority and responsibility in regulating and, in particular, modifying these types of project
proposals. It should be noted that the protections in the HAA and the density bonus provisions in
the DBL work in concert with one another. A more detailed discussion and initial analysis of the
proposed project in reference to these policies has been provided as attached to this report
(Attachment H).
Public Engagement
Consistent with the City’s Public Engagement and Noticing (PEN) Manual and the City’s
Municipal Code, the project was noticed per the City’s notification requirements for
Development Projects. Newspaper legal advertisements were posted in the New Times ten days
prior to each advisory body meeting (ARC, PC, and City Council). Additionally, postcards were
sent to both tenants and owners of properties located within 300 feet of the project site 10 days
before each advisory body hearing. Public comment was provided to the advisory bodies through
written correspondence and through public testimony at each of the hearings.
CONCURRENCE
Staff comments provided during review of the proposed project and appeals are incorporated into
the presented evaluations and conditions of approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects; Section 15332
of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, because the project is
consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the
applicable zoning designation and regulations. It should be noted that modification to zoning
regulations as required by State Density Bonus law, do not disqualify a project from claiming
this exemption. See Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1329, 1338 (2011). The
project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban
uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, and is served by
required utilities and public services. The project has been reviewed by the City Public Works
Department, Transportation Division, and no significant traffic impacts were identified, based on
the size and location of the project. Approval of the project would not result in any significant
effects related to noise, air quality, or water quality because the proposed project has been
reviewed by the City Utilities and Fire Departments, and it was determined that th e project
7 LUE Policy 2.6.3. Amenities. The City shall encourage development of attractive multifamily housing likely to be
occupied by students to provide the amenities that students may otherwise seek in single-family areas.
Packet Page 131
Item 8
would be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2019-21
Funding Identified: Fee supported activity based on 100% cost recovery
Funding Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing Cost
General Fund N/A
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total
Per policy, Development Service fees are based on 100% cost recovery. However, during the
2016 Fee Study the Council approved a 20-40% cost recovery for appeals. The average
estimated labor cost for a Tier 1 appeal is $3,116, and the current fee for applicants is $1,642.85
and non-applicants is $657.35. As a result, there is a minor fiscal impact associated with every
appeal that is intended to ensure public participation and a fair opportunity for the community to
appeal decisions made by City advisory bodies.
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny both appeals, thereby approving the project as recommended by the Planning
Commission. This alternative is not recommended because the PC condition No. 3 requiring
the elimination of the double doors is inconsistent with the Uniform Housing Code and the
Density Bonus Law.
2. Uphold the appellants appeal, and deny the applicants appeal, thereby modifying the
resolution to address parking. This alternative is not recommended because staff does not
have any design alternatives prepared that would be consistent with the Uniform Housing
Code and the Density Bonus Law.
3. Deny the project. The Council can deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with
California State Law, the City’s General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City
regulations. Should Council want to pursue this alternative, Staff recommends that specific
information be provided in order for staff to return with findings to support Council
direction.
4. Continue consideration of the appeals to a future date. The Council can continue review
of the appeal to a future meeting. If this alternative is taken, the Council should provide
direction to staff regarding additional information needed to make a decision.
Packet Page 132
Item 8
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution
b - Bedroom Partition Memo
c - READING FILE - Project Plans
d - READING FILE - ARC Report and Minutes from April 1, 2019
e - READING FILE - PC Report, Minutes, and Modified Resolution from May 8, 2019
f - Applicant Appeal (APPL-0393-2019)
g - David Joy Appeal APPL-0394-2019)
h - Policy Context
Packet Page 133
Item 8
R _______
RESOLUTION NO. ________ (2019 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF THE
APPLICANT (APPL-0393-2019) TO REMOVE CONDITION NO. 3 THAT
PLANNING COMMISSION ADDED TO RESTRICT ACCESS TO
BEDROOMS TO A SINGLE DOOR RATHER THAN THE PROPOSED
DOUBLE DOORS; AND DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT
(APPL-0394-2019), THEREBY GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A THREE-STORY MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
CONSISTING OF 15 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 430 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL SPACE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES TWO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVE REQUESTS FOR
A DENSITY BONUS OF 97.5 PERCENT AND RELIEF OF SITE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW GROUND FLOOR
RESIDENCES WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET OF FLOOR AREA
ADJACENT TO THE STREET. THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICAL
EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. AS REPRESENTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED SEPTEMBER 17,
2019 (1121 MONTALBAN, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on April 1, 2019, with a 4-0-3 vote recommending approval of the project with
direction to the Planning Commission for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines,
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2008-2018, Chris Baranek, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
May 8, 2019, with a 4-2-1 vote approving the project subject to the findings and conditions of
Resolution No. PC-1003-2019, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2008-2018 and
AFFH-2009-2018, Chris Baranek, applicant; and
WHEREAS, Damien Mavis, representing the applicant, filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission’s action on May 8, 2019 (APPL-0393-2019); and
WHEREAS, David Joy, appellant, filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s action
on May 8, 2019 (APPL-0394-2019); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 1,
2019, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under APPL-0393-2019 and APPL-0394-2019, Damien
Mavis and David Joy, appellants; and
Packet Page 134
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all
evidence, including the record of the Planning Commission hearing and action, testimony of the
appellants and interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said
hearing.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings to uphold the applicants appeal (APPL-0393-2019) and denies the appeal of the appellant
(APPL-0394-2019) of the Planning Commission decision, hereby granting final approval to the
project (ARCH-2008-2018 and AFFH-2009-2018):
1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and
will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.6 “Housing and Businesses” and
3.8.5 (Mixed Uses) because the project provides residential dwellings within a commercial
district near neighborhood commercial centers, major activity nodes and transit opportunities.
Housing at this location is and can be compatible with the proposed and existing commercial
uses on-site and on adjacent properties.
3. The project is consistent with the Housing Element because the project provides a variety of
residential types, sizes, and style of dwellings (HE Goal 5), and encourages the development
of housing above ground-level commercial uses (HE 5.3).
4. The project is consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element policy 4.4.3 because
the project promotes higher-density, compact housing to achieve more efficient use of public
facilities and services and to improve the City’s jobs/housing balance.
5. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, since the proposed
building design complies with all property development standards including height, setbacks,
coverage, floor area ratio, density, and parking for the Tourist Commercial (C-T) zone.
6. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for Mixed-Use Projects
(Section 17.70.130), since the proposed building design complies with objective design
criteria and performance standards for mixed-use development.
Packet Page 135
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 3
Architectural Review Findings
7. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines for multi-
family housing design and Infill Development because the architectural style is
complementary to the surrounding neighborhood designed consistent with the prevailing
setback pattern of the neighborhood, with parking provided interior to the site.
8. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines by
providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest and articulation to the
building design that are compatible with the design and scale of the existing structures in the
surrounding neighborhood (CDG, Chapter 5.3).
9. As conditioned, the project respects the privacy of adjacent residences through appropriate
building orientation and windows that minimize overlook and do not impair the privacy of
the indoor or outdoor living space of neighboring residential structures.
10. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because the development is designed
in a manner that does not deprive reasonable solar access to adjacent properties by positioning
the majority of the building mass along the street frontage and toward commercial properties
that incorporates vertical and horizontal wall plan offsets providing a high-quality and
aesthetically pleasing architectural design.
11. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project is necessary to provide additional dwelling
units to be dedicated affordable for “very-low” income households.
Density Bonus and Alternative Incentives Findings
12. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
Chapter 17.140 of the Zoning Regulations, and the requested density bonus and reduction to
site development standards are necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing
units.
13. The requests for a density bonus and reduction to site development standards for location of
residential units are consistent with the intent of Housing Element programs 2.17, 6.10, and
6.19, and the alternative affordable housing incentives outlined in Section 17.140.070 of the
Zoning Regulations.
14. The reduction in development standards for the location of residential units will not
negatively alter the overall character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because
primary commercial activities in the neighborhood are oriented toward Santa Rosa Street
rather than Montalban, and residential uses on the ground floor along the street frontage is
consistent and compatible with the existing neighborhood pattern and necessary to provide
for the density bonus and required affordable housing.
Packet Page 136
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 4
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the project is consistent
with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning
designation and regulations. The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or
threatened species and is served by required utilities and public services. The project has been
reviewed by the City Public Works Department, Transportation Division, and no significant traffic
impacts were identified, based on the size and location of the project.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
additional requirements applicable to the project. The City Council does hereby grant final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the PC (ARCH-2008-2018). A
separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit
that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2.
Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are
addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions
of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as
deemed appropriate.
2. Demolition of the existing building shall not commence until a permit has been issued by the
building official. The applicant shall comply with Municipal Code Chapter 15.04
Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations, Appendix Chapter A2 Demolition and Moving
of Buildings, including but not limited to, the following: the applicant shall provide evidence
that for a period of not less than 90 days from date of permit application, the building was
advertised in a local newspaper on at least 3 separate occasions not less than 15 days apart,
as available to any interested person to be moved, and submit historic documentation for the
structure.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall replace the fence along the west property line to
include a concrete/block wall, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director.
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall provide an entry oriented toward the primary street
frontage for the residential unit on the ground floor along Montalban Street, the entry shall
provide design details in the form of a stoop, overhangs, or front porch fronting the primary
street, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant is encouraged to provide a Trip
Reduction Plan to reduce vehicle trips to and from the property, the plan shall clearly identify
Packet Page 137
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 5
the responsibility for monitoring and reporting the progress of the Trip Reduction Program to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the Transportation Division.
The Trip Reduction Plan shall be clear on the performance measures, how they will be
monitored/measured.
6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the
color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application.
7. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include recessed window details and all other
details including but not limited to awnings, and railings. Plans shall indicate the type of
materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall
include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high-quality materials for all design
features that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with the
neighborhood character, to the approval of the Community Development Director.
8. Plans submitted for a building permit shall provide bike storage for the second and third floor
units to be located on the ground floor, subject to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
9. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required short and
long-term bicycle parking for residential and commercial uses, plans submitted for
construction permits shall include bicycle lockers or interior space within each residential unit
or parking area for the storage of at least two bicycle per residential unit. Sufficient detail
shall be provided about the placement and design of bike racks and lockers to demonstrate
compliance with relevant Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to the
satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Directors.
10. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating
compliance with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained value of 10
foot-candles. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting,
shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures
shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All
wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the
building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets
on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light
is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation
standards contained in Chapter 17.70.100 of the Zoning Regulations.
11. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal
of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly
show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any
condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a
building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen
Packet Page 138
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 6
them. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements
12. The storage area for trash and recycling cans shall be screened from the public right-of-way.
The subject property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner at all times; free of
excessive leaves, branches, and other landscape material. The applicant shall be responsible
for the clean-up of any landscape material in the public right-of-way.
13. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with
corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
14. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the back-flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street
yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
15. The design of proposed structure will incorporate site planning measures and noise
attenuating construction techniques that reduces noise exposure to acceptable levels.
Exposure in outdoor activity areas must not exceed 65 dB and indoor exposure must not
exceed 45 dB consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Plans submitted for construction
permits must clearly indicate and describe noise attenuation measures, techniques, and
materials, and demonstrates their compliance with noise levels limits.
16. Prior to building occupancy, the owner of the property shall provide a Residential Noise
Notice in writing for residential occupants stating that the property is located within a
commercial zone in an urban-type environment and that noise levels may be higher than a
strictly residential area.
17. Plans submitted for a building permit shall identify parking that is to be provided as
“unbundled”. Unbundled parking shall be leased separately from the rental fees for dwelling
units for the life of the dwelling units, such that potential renters have the option of renting a
residential unit at a price lower than would be the case if there were a single price for both
the residential unit and the parking space. Renters of onsite inclusionary affordable units shall
have an equal opportunity to rent a parking space on the same terms and conditions as offered
to renters of other dwelling units.
Packet Page 139
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 7
18. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking
calculation for the commercial component of the project upon the submittal of Planning and
Building permits for tenant changes or improvements to ensure the site does not become
under-parked.
19. Any new proposed signage or murals shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to ensure
appropriateness for the site and compliance with the Sign Regulations. Signage shall
coordinate with building architecture and the type of land use. The Director may refer signage
to the ARC if it seems excessive or out of character with the project.
Affordable Housing – Community Development
20. Prior to issuance of building permits, the city and the project owners shall enter into an
Affordable Housing Agreement, to be recorded in the office of the county recorder. The
agreement shall specify mechanisms or procedures to assure the continued affordability and
availability of the very-low income households resulting in two density units consistent with
Table 8-3 of the Zoning Regulations (§17.140.040.E), to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development
21. Projects involving the construction of new structures require that complete frontage
improvements be installed and that existing improvements be up graded per City Engineering
Standards. MC 12.16.050.
22. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be repaired or replaced
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
23. Curb, gutter, and street grades shall be established by the engineer of record and shall conform
to the existing curb grade to the west. The design for project frontage shall include analysis
of the existing curb grades located to the east and shall consider and honor the ultimate grades
for the gap in curb and gutter.
24. The proposed frontage improvements shall include a sidewalk transition to the adjoining
grade. An AC swale and/or berm/mountable berm may be required to control the street
drainage captured by the frontage improvements.
25. The developer/contractor shall provide reasonable notice to the adjoining property owner with
an option for participating in the completion of curb and gutter (optional sidewalk) to control
drainage.
26. The project frontage improvements shall conform to the City Engineering Standards. The
architectural, civil, and landscape plans shall all agree on the sidewalk width and
configuration. Detached sidewalk with a transition to the full width commercial sidewalk
section to the west is the preferred standard. Integral sidewalk, if proposed shall be first
approved by the City.
Packet Page 140
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 8
27. Development of the driveway and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and Driveway
Standards for dimensions, maneuverability, slopes, drainage, and materials. pervious paving
materials are recommended for surface parking lots for water quantity and/or quality control
purposes and within the area of the root zone/tree canopy of existing and proposed tree
plantings
28. The building submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. The utility plan shall show
all existing and proposed on-site and off-site utilities. Show the location of all overhead and
underground utilities along with the location of any utility company meters. Show all existing
and proposed improvements located within the public right-of-way if applicable.
29. New wire utility services including electrical service, phone, and cable TV shall be placed
underground. The undergrounding of utilities shall be completed without a net increase in
the number of required wood utility poles.
30. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. The
respective refuse storage area and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics,
safety, and functionality. Drainage from the trash enclosure shall be treated in accordance
with City Engineering Standard 1010.B and shall be included in the Post Construction
Stormwater Regulation compliance summary
31. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan for this
project. The plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations to
clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the high point elevation or
grade break at the yard areas and drainage arrows to show the proposed drainage. Include the
FF of the residence/garage, patio finish surface elevations, finish grade elevations, and yard
drainage.
32. The project drainage report and plans shall include analysis of the run-on from the adjacent
property to the east including any street drainage. The project plans shall show how the
tributary run-on will be collected and conveyed in a non-erosive manner.
33. The drainage report and plans shall show and note the historic drainage outlet to the existing
developed property to the south. The plans shall clarify how sheet flow will be induced to
replicate the historic drainage. The post-development flows shall not exceed the pre-
development flows for the 2 through 100-year storm events. Otherwise, the drainage shall be
conveyed through an easement or shall be collected and discharged to the street.
34. The building submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for developed
sites. The building plan submittal shall include a complete Post Construction Stormwater Plan
Checklist as available on the City’s website.
35. The building plan submittal shall include an operations and maintenance manual as required
for the Post Construction Stormwater improvements. A private stormwater conveyance
Packet Page 141
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 9
agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection approvals.
36. The proposed tree removals are supported by the City with the tree planting /mitigation
planting as shown on the plans. Street trees are generally required at the rate of one street tree
for each 35 lineal feet of street frontage.
37. The building plan submittal shall show and label the existing Oak Trees to remain. The site
development plan, foundation/wall plans, and utility plans shall limit the amount of
disturbance within the root zone/tree canopy of the trees to remain.
38. Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The
City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures to be
incorporated into the building plans. A pre-construction meeting with the City Arborist shall
be scheduled prior to building demolitions, tree removals, site grading, wall construction, and
building construction.
Utilities Department
39. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time the building permit is obtained and shall have reasonable alignments
needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along public roads.
40. The property’s existing sewer lateral to the point of connection at the City main must pass a
video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV inspection
shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the
Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
41. Any sewer lateral that crosses one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide
evidence that a private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior
to issuance of a Building Permit.
42. The project’s commercial and residential uses shall be metered separately. A separate water
meter shall be provided for each new parcel per Chapter 16.20.020.E of the City's Municipal
Code. The City's meters must be placed per the Engineering Standards, and a new 2" service
main shall be constructed for the proposed meter manifold.
43. Building permit submittal shall clarify size of existing and proposed water services and water
meters for the project.
44. The project’s Landscape Plan shall be consistent with provisions of the maximum applied
water allowance or (MAWA).
45. Trash enclosure and refuse bins shall be sized to provide a reasonable level of service per the
requirements of the San Luis Garbage Company.
Packet Page 142
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 10
46. Management of refuse generations for waste, recyclables, and organics shall comply with
state law per AB 1826, and the local waste management ordinance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
47. Recycled water, or another non-potable water source, shall be used for construction water
(dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction Water Permit is available from
the City’s Utilities Department.
Urban Forest Services (City Arborist) – Public Works
48. Tree removal permit is required from the City Arborist. Contact the City Arborist to
coordinate a site inspection and to verify tree removal permit application requirements. The
tree removal permit shall be issued prior to building permit issuance. Otherwise, the building
plans shall be revised to show tree preservations and/or removals.
Transportation Division – Public Works
49. Red curb paint shall be installed and maintained by the applicant or property owner along
each side of the site access driveway as follows:
• Painting shall extend 22’ to the left (north) of the driveway
• Painting shall extend 10’ to the right (south) of the driveway
50. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be responsible for paying current
Citywide Traffic Impact Fees.
Indemnification
51. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in
the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
Upon motion of ______________________, seconded by ________________, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this _____ day of ___________, 2019.
Packet Page 143
Item 8
Resolution No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 11
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, 2019.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Page 144
Item 8
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 7, 2019
TO: Planning Commission
BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Item #2 ARCH-2008-2018 (1121 Montalban) - Modification to the Draft
Resolution to address bedroom partitions.
DISCUSSION
The draft resolution of the Agenda Report for ARCH-2008-2018 (1121 Montalban) included
Condition No. 4 which states;
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall not provide for bedroom partitions within any
of the residential units, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
This condition was provided out of response from ARC direction intended to address parking for
the property, where the assumption was that partitions would increase the occupancy of a unit
resulting in a higher parking demand. This assumption was identified as inconsistent with the
Uniform Housing Code and the Density Bonus Law. In the case of Briseno v. City of Santa Ana a
City is preempted by the Uniform Housing Code in establishing occupancy limits. The occupancy
standards under the Uniform Housing Code is 150 square feet of net floor space for the first two
occupants and 100 square feet of net floor space for each additional occupant thereafter. The
Uniform Housing Code occupies this area of law and the City cannot establish more restrictive
standards. Furthermore, the Density Bonus Law Section 65915(p)(1) states that the City shall not
require vehicle parking that exceeds the following ratios; zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking
space, two to three bedrooms: two onsite parking spaces. The proposed partitions do not qualify
as additional bedrooms under the California Building Code, or the City’s Zoning Regulations.
In summary, the partitions that are used as privacy screens in the proposed project do not constitute
walls that create additional bedrooms in the project. Therefore, the partitions do not increase the
occupancy or the number of bedrooms in the project under the Zoning Regulations and Building
Code and do not result in additional parking requirements. Staff recommends elimination of
Condition No. 4 of the Draft Resolution to be consistent with the Uniform Housing Code, Density
Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, and other recently approved projects.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Revised Draft Resolution
Packet Page 145
Item 8
RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A THREE-STORY MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 15 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 430
SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES
TWO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVE
REQUESTS FOR A DENSITY BONUS OF 97.5 PERCENT AND RELIEF
OF SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW GROUND FLOOR
RESIDENCES WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET OF FLOOR AREA
ADJACENT TO THE STREET. THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICAL
EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. AS REPRESENTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MAY 8, 2019 (1121
MONTALBAN, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
conducted a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, on April 1, 2019, recommending approval of the project with direction to the
Planning Commission for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under ARCH-2008-2018, Chris Baranek, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
May 8, 2019, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2008-2018 and AFFH-2009-2018,
Chris Baranek, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered
all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby grants final approval to the
project (ARCH-2008-2018 and AFFH-2009-2018), based on the following findings:
1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and
will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.6 “Housing and Businesses” and
3.8.5 (Mixed Uses) because the project provides residential dwellings within a commercial
district near neighborhood commercial centers, major activity nodes and transit opportunities.
Packet Page 146
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 2
Housing at this location is and can be compatible with the proposed and existing commercial
uses on-site and on adjacent properties.
3. The project is consistent with the Housing Element because the project provides a variety of
residential types, sizes, and style of dwellings (HE Goal 5), and encourages the development
of housing above ground-level commercial uses (HE 5.3).
4. The project is consistent with the Conservation and Open Space Element policy 4.4.3 because
the project promotes higher-density, compact housing to achieve more efficient use of public
facilities and services and to improve the City’s jobs/housing balance.
5. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, since the proposed
building design complies with all property development standards including height, setbacks,
coverage, floor area ratio, density, and parking for the Tourist Commercial (C-T) zone.
6. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for Mixed-Use Projects
(Section 17.70.130), since the proposed building design complies with objective design
criteria and performance standards for mixed-use development.
Architectural Review Findings
7. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines for multi -
family housing design and Infill Development because the architectural style is
complementary to the surrounding neighborhood designed consistent with the prevailing
setback pattern of the neighborhood, with parking provided interior to the site.
8. As conditioned, the project design is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines by
providing a variety of architectural treatments that add visual interest and articulation to the
building design that are compatible with the design and scale of the existing structures in the
surrounding neighborhood (CDG, Chapter 5.3).
9. As conditioned, the project respects the privacy of adjacent residences through appropriate
building orientation and windows that minimize overlook and do not impair the privacy of
the indoor or outdoor living space of neighboring residential structures.
10. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project will not negatively alter the overall
character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because the development is designed
in a manner that does not deprive reasonable solar access to adjacent properties by positioning
the majority of the building mass along the street frontage and toward commercial properties
that incorporates vertical and horizontal wall plan offsets providing a high-quality and
aesthetically pleasing architectural design.
11. The proposed height, mass and scale of the project is necessary to provide additional dwelling
units to be dedicated affordable for “very-low” income households.
Packet Page 147
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 3
Density Bonus and Alternative Incentives Findings
12. The proposed project will provide quality affordable housing consistent with the intent of
Chapter 17.140 of the Zoning Regulations, and the requested density bonus and reduction to
site development standards are necessary to facilitate the production of affordable housing
units.
13. The requests for a density bonus and reduction to site development standards for location of
residential units are consistent with the intent of Housing Element programs 2.17, 6.10, and
6.19, and the alternative affordable housing incentives outlined in Section 17.140.070 of the
Zoning Regulations.
14. The reduction in development standards for the location of residential units will not
negatively alter the overall character of the neighborhood or the streets appearance because
primary commercial activities in the neighborhood are oriented toward Santa Rosa Street
rather than Montalban, and residential uses on the ground floor along the street frontage is
consistent and compatible with the existing neighborhood pattern and necessary to provide
for the density bonus and required affordable housing.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the project is consistent
with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning
designation and regulations. The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or
threatened species and is served by required utilities and public services. The project has been
reviewed by the City Public Works Department, Transportation Division, and no significant traffic
impacts were identified, based on the size and location of the project.
SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code
requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include
additional requirements applicable to the project. The Planning Commission (PC) hereby grants
final approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the PC (ARCH-2008-2018). A
separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit
that lists all conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2.
Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are
addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions
of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as
deemed appropriate.
2. Demolition of the existing building shall not commence until a permit has been issued by the
Packet Page 148
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 4
building official. The applicant shall comply with Municipal Code Chapter 15.04
Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations, Appendix Chapter A2 Demolition and Moving
of Buildings, including but not limited to, the following: the applicant shall provide evidence
that for a period of not less than 90 days from date of permit application, the building was
advertised in a local newspaper on at least 3 separate occasions not less than 15 days apart,
as available to any interested person to be moved, and submit historic documentation for the
structure.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall provide an entry oriented toward the primary street
frontage for the residential unit on the ground floor along Montalban Street, the entry shall
provide design details in the form of a stoop, overhangs, or front porch fronting the primary
street, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant is encouraged to provide a Trip
Reduction Plan to reduce vehicle trips to and from the property, the plan shall clearly identify
the responsibility for monitoring and reporting the progress of the Trip Reduction Program to
the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the Transportation Division.
The Trip Reduction Plan shall be clear on the performance measures, how they will be
monitored/measured.
5. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the
color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application.
6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include recessed window details and all other
details including but not limited to awnings, and railings. Plans shall indicate the type of
materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall
include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high-quality materials for all design
features that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with the
neighborhood character, to the approval of the Community Development Director.
7. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required short and
long-term bicycle parking for residential and commercial uses, plans submitted for
construction permits shall include bicycle lockers or interior space within each residential unit
or parking area for the storage of at least two bicycle per residential unit. Sufficient detail
shall be provided about the placement and design of bike racks and lockers to demonstrate
compliance with relevant Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to t he
satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Directors.
8. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating
compliance with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained value of 10
foot-candles. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting,
shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures
shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All
Packet Page 149
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 5
wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the
building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets
on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light
is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation
standards contained in Chapter 17.70.100 of the Zoning Regulations.
9. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal
of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly
show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any
condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a
building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen
them. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be
adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements
10. The storage area for trash and recycling cans shall be screened from the public right -of-way.
The subject property shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner at all times; free of
excessive leaves, branches, and other landscape material. The applicant shall be responsible
for the clean-up of any landscape material in the public right-of-way.
11. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with
corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
12. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the back-flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street
yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate
by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
13. Prior to building occupancy, the owner of the property shall provide a Residential Noise
Notice in writing for residential occupants stating that the property is located within a
commercial zone in an urban-type environment and that noise levels may be higher than a
strictly residential area.
14. Plans submitted for a building permit shall identify parking that is to be provided as
“unbundled”. Unbundled parking shall be leased separately from the rental fees for dwelling
units for the life of the dwelling units, such that potential renters have the option of renting a
residential unit at a price lower than would be the case if there were a single price for both
the residential unit and the parking space. Renters of onsite inclusionary affordable units shall
Packet Page 150
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 6
have an equal opportunity to rent a parking space on the same terms and conditions as offered
to renters of other dwelling units.
15. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking
calculation for the commercial component of the project upon the submittal of Planning and
Building permits for tenant changes or improvements to ensure the site does not become
under-parked.
16. Any new proposed signage or murals shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to ensure
appropriateness for the site and compliance with the Sign Regulations. Signage shall
coordinate with building architecture and the type of land use. The Director may refer signage
to the ARC if it seems excessive or out of character with the project.
Affordable Housing – Community Development
17. Prior to issuance of building permits, the city and the project owners shall enter into an
Affordable Housing Agreement, to be recorded in the office of the county recorder. The
agreement shall specify mechanisms or procedures to assure the continued affordability and
availability of the very-low income households resulting in two density units consistent with
Table 8-3 of the Zoning Regulations (§17.140.040.E), to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development
18. Projects involving the construction of new structures require that complete frontage
improvements be installed and that existing improvements be up graded per City Engineering
Standards. MC 12.16.050.
19. Any sections of damaged or displaced curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be repaired or replaced
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
20. Curb, gutter, and street grades shall be established by the engineer of record and shall conform
to the existing curb grade to the west. The design for project frontage shall include analysis
of the existing curb grades located to the east and shall consider and honor the ultimate grades
for the gap in curb and gutter.
21. The proposed frontage improvements shall include a sidewalk transition to the adjoining
grade. An AC swale and/or berm/mountable berm may be required to control the street
drainage captured by the frontage improvements.
22. The developer/contractor shall provide reasonable notice to the adjoining property owner with
an option for participating in the completion of curb and gutter (optional sidewalk) to control
drainage.
23. The project frontage improvements shall conform to the City Engineering Standards. The
Packet Page 151
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 7
architectural, civil, and landscape plans shall all agree on the sidewalk width and
configuration. Detached sidewalk with a transition to the full width commercial sidewalk
section to the west is the preferred standard. Integral sidewalk, if proposed shall be first
approved by the City.
24. Development of the driveway and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and Driveway
Standards for dimensions, maneuverability, slopes, drainage, and materials. pervious paving
materials are recommended for surface parking lots for water quantity and/or quality control
purposes and within the area of the root zone/tree canopy of existing and proposed tree
plantings
25. The building submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. The utility plan shall show
all existing and proposed on-site and off-site utilities. Show the location of all overhead and
underground utilities along with the location of any utility company meters. Show all existing
and proposed improvements located within the public right-of-way if applicable.
26. New wire utility services including electrical service, phone, and cable TV shall be placed
underground. The undergrounding of utilities shall be completed without a net increase in
the number of required wood utility poles.
27. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. The
respective refuse storage area and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics,
safety, and functionality. Drainage from the trash enclosure shall be treated in accordance
with City Engineering Standard 1010.B and shall be included in the Post Construction
Stormwater Regulation compliance summary
28. The building plan submittal shall include a complete grading and drainage plan for this
project. The plan shall show the existing and proposed contours and/or spot elevations to
clearly depict the proposed grading and drainage. Show and label the high point elevation or
grade break at the yard areas and drainage arrows to show the proposed drainage. Include the
FF of the residence/garage, patio finish surface elevations, finish grade elevations, and yard
drainage.
29. The project drainage report and plans shall include analysis of the run-on from the adjacent
property to the east including any street drainage. The project plans shall show how the
tributary run-on will be collected and conveyed in a non-erosive manner.
30. The drainage report and plans shall show and note the historic drainage outlet to the existing
developed property to the south. The plans shall clarify how sheet flow will be induced to
replicate the historic drainage. The post-development flows shall not exceed the pre-
development flows for the 2 through 100-year storm events. Otherwise, the drainage shall be
conveyed through an easement or shall be collected and discharged to the street.
31. The building submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for developed
Packet Page 152
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 8
sites. The building plan submittal shall include a complete Post Construction Stormwater
Plan Checklist as available on the City’s website.
32. The building plan submittal shall include an operations and maintenance manual as required
for the Post Construction Stormwater improvements. A private stormwater conveyance
agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection approvals.
33. The proposed tree removals are supported by the City with the tree planting /mitigation
planting as shown on the plans. Street trees are generally required at the rate of one street
tree for each 35 lineal feet of street frontage.
34. The building plan submittal shall show and label the existing Oak Trees to remain. The site
development plan, foundation/wall plans, and utility plans shall limit the amount of
disturbance within the root zone/tree canopy of the trees to remain.
35. Tree protection measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. The
City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures to be
incorporated into the building plans. A pre-construction meeting with the City Arborist shall
be scheduled prior to building demolitions, tree removals, site grading, wall construction, and
building construction.
Utilities Department
36. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time the building permit is obtained, and shall have reasonable alignments
needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along public roads.
37. The property’s existing sewer lateral to the point of connection at the City main must pass a
video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV inspection
shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the
Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
38. Any sewer lateral that crosses one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide
evidence that a private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior
to issuance of a Building Permit.
39. The project’s commercial and residential uses shall be metered separately. A separate water
meter shall be provided for each new parcel per Chapter 16.20.020.E of the City's Municipal
Code. The City's meters must be placed per the Engineering Standards, and a new 2" service
main shall be constructed for the proposed meter manifold.
40. Building permit submittal shall clarify size of existing and proposed water services and water
meters for the project.
Packet Page 153
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 9
41. The project’s Landscape Plan shall be consistent with provisions of the maximum applied
water allowance or (MAWA).
42. Trash enclosure and refuse bins shall be sized to provide a reasonable level of service per the
requirements of the San Luis Garbage Company.
43. Management of refuse generations for waste, recyclables, and organics shall comply with
state law per AB 1826, and the local waste management ordinance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
44. Recycled water, or another non-potable water source, shall be used for construction water
(dust control, soil compaction, etc.). An annual Construction Water Permit is available from
the City’s Utilities Department.
Urban Forest Services (City Arborist) – Public Works
45. Tree removal permit is required from the City Arborist. Contact the City Arborist to
coordinate a site inspection and to verify tree removal permit application requirements. The
tree removal permit shall be issued prior to building permit issuance. Otherwise, the building
plans shall be revised to show tree preservations and/or removals.
Transportation Division – Public Works
46. Red curb paint shall be installed and maintained by the applicant or property owner along
each side of the site access driveway as follows:
• Painting shall extend 22’ to the left (north) of the driveway
• Painting shall extend 10’ to the right (south) of the driveway
47. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be responsible for paying current
Citywide Traffic Impact Fees.
Indemnification
48. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in
the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________,
and on the following roll call vote:
Packet Page 154
Item 8
Resolution No. PC-XXXX-19
1121 Montalban Street, ARCH-2008-2018 & AFFH-2009-2018
Page 10
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 8th day of May, 2019.
_____________________________
Xzandrea Fowler, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
Packet Page 155
Item 8
II
Lhll<.. l"-C<..Cl \<;..U Filing Fee
IZf Applicant: $ 1,64286 D Non-applicant $ 657 35
D Tree Appeal: $11615
RECEIVE D
MAY 2 0 2019
SLO CITY CLERK For Office Use Received by:~
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
SECT/ON 1. APPELLANT INFORMATION
Tuty\·~\en t:A°'"°\ ~
Name
"'Po Bo>< l 2.ql0 'Sa )'.\ LM~~ C>b"\~:po . cA 93~(p
Mailing Address and Zip Co'de
(<o os) 7l)\-~13 ~
Phone
(6os)7BI -32~3
Fax
Tiom ~-ecs.s. 1327 Atck.c';>m.&t1 -Sw,e. zu,. ~nLi1~D\:>,~...,cA
Representative's Name Mailing Address and Zip Code cr3'-I-DI
ArQ'\\-\Ut (~os)s41-L2~0
Title Phone Fax
SECTION2.SUBJECTOFAPPEAL
1 . In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1. Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code (copy attached). I hereby appeal the decision of the:
\>\O.f\h1 (oN\ ·1SS.
0
\D f\
(Name of O r. Committee or Commission decision being appealed)
2. The date the decision being appealed was rendered : tv\~ 5 1 2.0\~
3. The application or project was entitled: -'\ ..... \_2 _.l..__._t:1___._,0<..;..'i\.,_M=\ txJ....::;...,:=(\..L-________ _
4. I discussed the matter with the following City staff member:
-(s~t:~~~~~m~b~~=r·s=N=~-m_e_a_n_d _D_ep_a_rt_m-en_t_) _______ ~on ____ (D_a_re_) __ _
5. Has this matter been the subject of a previous appeal? If so, when was it heard and by whom:
SECTION 3. REASON FOR APPEAL
Explain specifically what action/s you are appealing and why you believe the Council should consider
your appeal. Include what evidence you have that supports your appeal. You may attach additional
pages, if necessary. This form continues on the other side .
12/18 update Page 1 of 3
II
Packet Page 156
Item 8
Reason for Appeal continued
SECTION 4. APPELLANT'S RESPONSIBILITY
The San Luis Obispo City Council values public participation in local government and
encourages all fo r ms of c itizen involvement. However, due to real costs associated with City
Cou ncil conside ration of an appe a l, in cludi ng pu b l ic notifi cation, all appeals pertaining to a
plann ing application or project are subject to th e f ollowing filing fee, which must accompany the
appeal form: Applicant= $1,642.85, Non-applicant=$ 657.35, Tree Appeal= $116.15.
Your ri gh t to exercise an appeal comes with ce rta in responsibilities. If you file an appeal,
please understa nd t hat it must be hea rd within 45 days from filing this form, except for matters
arising under Chapter 17 .66 of the z on ing code which shall be governed by that Chapter. You
will be notified in writing of the exact date your appeal will be heard before the Council. You or
your representative will be expected to attend the public hearing, and to be prepared to make
your case. Your testimony is limited to 10 minutes.
A continuance may be granted under certain and unusual circumstances. If you feel you
need to request a continuance, you must submit your request in writing to the City Clerk. Please be
advised that if your request for continuance is received after the appeal is noticed to the public, the
Council may not be able to grant the request for continuance. Submitting a request for continuance
does not guarantee that it will be granted; that action is at the discretion of the City Council.
I hereby agree to appear and/or send a representative to appear on my behalf when
said appeal is scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council.
(S ignature of Appellant)
This item is hereby calendared for----------------------
cc: City Attorney
City Manager
Department Head
Advisory Body Chairperson
Advisory Body Liaison
City Clerk (original)
11 /17 update Page 2 of 3
Packet Page 157
Item 8
Sections:
1.20.010 Title.
1.20.020 Right to appeal.
Chapter 1.20
APPEALS PROCEDURE
1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal.
1.20.040 Hearing -Notice.
1.20.050 Hearing -Appellant to show cause -Council's determination final.
1.20.010 Title.
This chapter shall be known as the "Appeals Procedure" for the city. (Prior code§ 1400)
1.20.020 Right to appeal.
A. Except where an appeals procedure is otherwise specifically set forth in this code , any person
objecting to the approval, denial, suspension or revocation of a license , permit or entitlement of any
nature, the determination or issuance of which is under any of the provisions of this code , or to any
administrative decision made by any city official, if the approval, denial , suspension or revocation of such
license, permit or entitlement or the determination of such administrative decision involves the exercise of
administrative discretion or personal judgment exercised under any of the provisions of this code , may
appeal in writing to the council by filing with the city clerk a written notice of such appeal, stating the
specific grounds for the appeal.
8. No appeal may be taken to any such administrative decision made by a city official under the
provisions of this chapter unless such decision to appeal has been first taken up with the department
head concerned, and where an appeals board is empowered to consider interpretation and enforcement
questions, unless such decision to appeal has been considered by such appeals board .
C. No right of appeal to the council from any administrative decision made by a city official under any of
the provisions of this code shall exist when such decision is ministerial and thus does not involve the
exercise of administrative discretion or personal judgment exercised under any of the provisions of this
code, whether the administrative decision involves the approval , denial, suspension or revocation of a
license, permit, entitlement or any other administrative decision. (Ord. 1044 § 1, 1985: prior code § 1401)
1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal.
The appellant shall file a notice of appeal with the city clerk with in ten calendar days after the date upon
which the administrative decision appealed from is made. In the event the last day of the filing period falls
on a nonbusiness day, the appeal period shall be extended to include the next business day, and this rule
shall apply whenever an appeal procedure is specifically set forth elsewhere in this code. (Prior code §
1402)
1.20 .040 Hearing -Notice.
Upon receipt of the filing of the notice of appeal in its proper form, the city clerk shall place the matter on
the council agenda. Except in cases of emergency, when the council may determine the matter
immediately, or where state law prescribes a different appeal process, the clerk shall set the matter for
hearing at the next reasonably available council meeting, but in no event later than forty-five calendar
days after the date of the filing of such notice of appeal with the city clerk. The city clerk shall cause
written notice of such hearing to be given to the applicant not less than five business days prior to such
hearing, unless such notice is waived in writing by the applicant. (Ord. 1252 § 1, 1994: prior code§ 1403)
1.20.050 Hearing -Appellant to show cause -Council's determination final.
At such hearing the appellant shall show cause on the grounds specified in the notice of appeal why the
action appealed from should not be approved. The council may continue the hearing from time to time ,
and its findings on the appeal shall be final and conclusive in the matter. (Prior code§ 1404)
11 /17 update Page 3 of 3
Packet Page 158
Item 8
May 20, 2019
Kyle Bell
Associate Planner
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Arris
STUDIO ARCHITECTS
Application#:
Project:
ARCH-2008-2018, AFFH-2009-2018
1121 Montalban
The proposed mixed-use project at 1121 Montalban Street was approved by the planning
commission on May 8, 2019. While we are pleased that the project was approved, there was a
specific condition of approval added at the planning commission hearing that we do not agree
with. Therefore, we are appealing the decision to the City Council based on the fact that the
condition, as applied to the project by the planning commission, is holding this project to a
different standard than other projects that have been recently approved and eliminates the
practical use of bedroom partitions.
The condition in question relates to the planning commission limiting bedroom access to a single
door.
This is a very simple issue. However, there is some nuance that deserves explanation.
Planning commissioners made it clear at the hearing that they wished to limit the number of
potential occupants and discourage students from living in the building. It was discussed at the
hearing that the city needs housing for downtown workers and that this project was not likely to
supply that. They also stated that housing with more that one person per bedroom is considered
overcrowding and therefore is not consistent with the city's policies. Both sentiments are
discriminatory in nature, and factually incorrect.
Prior to the planning commission hearing, Kyle Bell, the city planner for the project. issued a
memo to the planning commission requesting that the proposed condition of approval number
4 related to bedroom partitions be removed. The draft condition stated: "plans submitted for a
building permit shall not provide for bedroom partitions within the residential units ... "
This memo explained that this condition of approval was added in an attempt to address
parking, where the assumption was that partitions would increase the occupancy of the unit
resulting in a higher parking demand. The memo then went into great detail. even quoting
established case law, explaining that any attempt by the City to limit occupancy is inconsistent
with the Uniform Housing Code and the Density Bonus Law. The memo than states that the
proposed bedroom partitions do not qualify as additional bedrooms under the California
Building Code, or the City's Zoning Regulations. The memo concludes with the statement that
"staff recommends elimination of Condition No. 4 of the draft resolution to be consistent with the
Uniform Housing Code, Density Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, and other recently
approved projects."
1327 Archer Street, Suite 220 I San Luis Obispo. CA 93401 805 547 2240 I orris-studio.com
Thomas E. Jess, Stephen A. Rigor. . . , . ,.· ,. Packet Page 159
Item 8
It is important to note that double doors are not a separate building element from the bedroom
partitions. Rather, they are a key component of the proposed bedroom partitions. They are
shown on the plans that were submitted to the planning commission as part of the proposed
bedroom partitions. They have also been reviewed, approved and installed at other similar
projects within the City. Furthermore, without the double doors, there is no purpose to the room
dividers.
The planning commissioners apparently agreed that the City did not have the legal authority to
limit occupancy because they removed condition of approval number 4 based on the advice
of staff as outlined in the memo.
However, what the planning commissioners did at the hearing was significantly worse than
applying a misguided condition of approval without knowledge that what they were doing was
in violation of the law. They were fully informed that the City does not have the authority to limit
occupancy prior to the hearing. Even with this knowledge, they knowingly applied an alternate
condition of approval in order to limit occupancy. Instead of eliminating the bedroom
partitions, they isolated one component of the bedroom partitions for elimination with the intent
of achieving the same goal. They knowingly forced the bedroom partitions to be eliminated by
eliminating the double doors.
The planning commissioners left no doubt as to their intent. Statements by planning
commissioners at the hearing focused on the idea that a single door is a way to limit the number
of occupants, as well as appeal less to students and more to non-students.
Room dividers and the associated double doors were included in this plan because students,
tenants and those in affordable housing tend to have roommates. Knowing this, we included
bedroom partitions in the bedrooms to increase the livability of these units. If it's a single in the
room then there would typically be a larger bed and the partition would be open. If there were
two in a room then each would have a single bed and the ability to close the room divider for
privacy. This could be for one person sleeping and one studying, or just the peace of mind of
having private space. We see these livability enhancements as promoting a higher quality living
arrangement for the tenants. This is quite the opposite of what some landlords are accused of
doing which is cramming tenants in garage conversions, etc. For the City to request that a
developer omit features which would clearly enhance the livability of a home, both deed
restricted affordable for Very Low incomes and market rate, is a punishment to the tenants.
For reference the exact same bedroom partitions were approved for or currently being used in
San Luis Obispo at:
• Icon SLO:
• 22 Chorro (The Academy)
• 71 Palomar
• 790 Foothill
Approved October 13, 2014
Approved November 10, 2016
Approved April 4, 2017
Approved July 16, 2018
It is based on the above information that we request that the city council uphold the approval
of the project at 1121 Montalban Street but remove the condition related to limiting bedroom
access to a single door.
Please feel free to reach out to our office with any questions .
. ,,,,y,,s, 1306 Johnson Avenue I San Luis Obispo. CA 93401 ('o,, ,,c 805.547.2240 I orris-studio.com
Thomas E. Jess, .,,c,,,;,c, ·,C2u,oa Stephen A Rigor. ,K,•nfcr ,c:uo1·, Packet Page 160
Item 8
Packet Page 161
Item 8
Packet Page 162
Item 8
Packet Page 163
Item 8
Packet Page 164
Item 8
Policy Context
State Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law. The Housing Accountability Act (HAA),
codified in Government Code § 65589.5, applies to any “housing development project”, and was amended
last year to include “mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least
two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use.” Government Code § 65589.5(h)(2)(B)1.
The proposed project is a mixed-use project where more than two thirds of the project’s square footage is
devoted to residential use. As such, if the project complies with all applicable objective standards, then
certain findings are required in order for the agency to lawfully (1) deny the project; or (2) reduce or
impose conditions which have the effect of reducing the project’ s density. In 2017, the State legislature
amended the HAA to require that the findings be supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the
record and the agency bears the burden of proof. By design, the legislature has crafted the findings to be
difficult for agencies to make findings to deny a project. Specifically, in order to deny a HAA project or
reduce density, the agency must find that:
“The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public
health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the
project be developed at a lower density...and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily
mitigate or avoid the adverse impact…other than disapproval…or the approval…at a lower
density” Gov. Code § 65589.5(j)(1)(A)&(B)
A “specific, adverse impact” is defined to mean a “significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable
impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as
they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” Government Code § 65589.5(j)(1).
Accordingly, the City Council may only lawfully deny the project or reduce its density if it determines the
project or the additional density causes a specific adverse health or safety impact. Standards such as
“compatibility” can be lawfully used to impose design conditions but cannot be used to deny a housing
project or reduce density. The reason is because the standard of compatibility is subjective in nature and
not necessarily related to public health and safety and the HAA requires the specific adverse impact be
based on objective health and safety standards. Also, even if the City identifies a specific adverse impact,
the City has the obligation to prove that “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the
adverse impact… other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the
project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.” Government Code § 65589.5(j)(1)(B).
Density Bonus Law. It should be noted that the protections in the HAA and the density bonus provisions
in the Density Bonus Law (DBL), discussed below, work in concert with one another. Specifically,
Government Code § 65589.5(j)(3) states that: “…the receipt of a density bonus pursuant to § 65915 shall
not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not
in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard,
1 Government Code § 65589.5 (h)(2)(B) Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses
with at least two thirds of the square footage designated for residential use.
Packet Page 165
Item 8
Council Agenda Item #2546
1121 Montalban Street (APPL-0393-2019 & APPL-0394-2019)
Page 2
requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision.” In other words, the legislature has
determined that the benefits afforded by the DBL do not render the protections in the HAA inapplicable.
The DBL, codified in Government Code § 65915, mandates that public agencies provide a density bonus
and relax development standards through incentives, concessions or waivers if a proposed project includes
a prescribed percentage of affordable housing. The level of the density bonus and the number of incentives
or concessions is dependent on the amount of affordable housing provided and the level of affordability.
A city cannot require a developer to provide a greater percentage of units or deeper level of affordability
than prescribed by the statute in order to qualify for the densit y bonus. See Latinos Unidos del Valle de
Napa y Solano v. County of Napa, 217 Cal. App. 4th 1160 (2013). For this project, the applicant is
requesting a density bonus that would increase the total number of density units to 8.16, rounded up to 9
density units pursuant to Section 17.140.040.B (26 units per acre), resulting in a 97.5% density bonus. To
receive a 97.5% density bonus (Gov. Code § 69515(f)(2)), the applicant must provide 36% of base units
restricted to very-low income households, as outlined in Zoning Regulation Chapter 17.140.040(E), which
equals 3 very-low income units. The applicant has proposed 3 one-bedroom units to be dedicated to very-
low income units. Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(C) and Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.140.070(A) states that
three (3) incentives or concessions shall be granted for housing developments that include at least 15%
for very-low income households. The City must also ensure that the affordable units will remain affordable
for 55 years and that the rents will not exceed those permitted by State law (Gov. Code § 65915(c)(1). On
top of this requirement, Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1) mandates that “in no case may a city…apply any
development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development
meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by
this [the DBL].” In other words, the DBL law requires a city to relax its development standards in order
for the project to physically incorporate the additional units permitted under the law.
Similar to the HAA, there are protections for projects using the DBL. No grounds are provided that would
allow a city to deny a density bonus; rather, "a city … shall grant one density bonus…." (Gov. Code §
65925(b)(1); see also Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1329, 1330 (2011) ("Wollmer")
("Section 65915 mandates that local governments provide a density bonus…" (emphasis added).
Developers can also request modifications of development standards by requesting either
incentives/concessions (they are the same) or waivers. Incentives or concessions refer to “regulatory
incentives” that provide “identifiable and actual cost reductions” to provide for the affordable housing
(Gov. Code § 65915(k)); in other words, they are provided to allow for modifications that result in an
actual reduction of costs to the project so the affordable housing is economically feasible. Waivers of
development standards are provided under Government Code § 65915(e) if the usual development
standards would “physically preclude” a development from being constructed with the density bonus
requested; a project with a 35% greater density may require modifications of development standards to fit
on a site. Necessary waivers may only be denied if the agency can make a finding based on substantial
evidence that the waiver is contrary to state or federal law, would have an adverse impact on property
listed on the California Historical Register, or would cause a “specific, adverse impact” upon the public
health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily
mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. The definition of “specific, adverse impact” is the same as
that in the HAA – i.e. a “significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective,
identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the
application was deemed complete.”
Packet Page 166
Item 8
Council Agenda Item #2546
1121 Montalban Street (APPL-0393-2019 & APPL-0394-2019)
Page 3
This project includes one waiver of otherwise applicable property development standards to allow
residential uses on the ground floor within 50 feet of the building frontage toward the street. The stated
purpose of these modifications is to allow for the physical construction of the additional density units.
Under density bonus law, this modification is properly analyzed as a waiver, not an incentive. In order to
deny these waivers, the City would be required to make the statutory findings based on the standards as
discussed and defined above. Again, to use the example noted above, the City cannot simply deny the
waivers based on findings that the reduction in site development standards is not “compatible” with the
neighborhood. Under State law, the City must identify either a violation of state or federal law, an impact
on a historic property, or a specific adverse impact on the public health, safety, or the physical environment
that is directly caused by the waiver, and determine that there is no feasible way to satisfactorily mitigate
it or find an alternative.
In this case, the objective of the mixed-use project design standards is to create a provide a commercial
street frontage for mixed use projects which promotes pedestrian -oriented building scale and location to
create a pedestrian-friendly environment. The proposed residential setback reduction on the ground floor
is appropriate for this site and location because primary commercial activities in the neighborhood are
primarily oriented toward Santa Rosa Street rather than Montalban. The proposed residential uses on the
ground floor are consistent and compatible with the existing neighborhood pattern and necessary to
provide for the density bonus and required affordable housing.
Packet Page 167
Item 8
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Page 168
Item 8