The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-08-14SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chamber City Hall - 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 January 8, 2014 Wednesday 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, William Riggs, Charles Stevenson, Vice -Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Commissioners or staff may modify the order of items. MINUTES: Minutes of December 11, 12, and 16, 2013. Approve or amend. PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to five minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NOTE: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the action (Recommendations to the City Council cannot be appealed since they are not a final action.). Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department, City Clerk's office, or on the City's website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal documentation. If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes; consultant and project presentations limited to six minutes. 1. 1060 Osos Street. A 185-13: Request to modify the existing non-alcoholic Night Club Use Permit to allow alcohol and consider granting a PCN (Public Convenience Necessity) for a new liquor license (beer and wine) in the downtown including a statutory exemption under CEQA; C-D-H zone; Ryan Bendicto, applicant. (Doug Davidson) Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the Community Development, 919 Palm Street, during normal business hours. Planning Commission Agenda Page 2 2. City -Wide. GPI/ER 15-12: General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements Update: The City of San Luis Obispo (City) will prepare a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Elements Update. We need input as to the scope and content of the environmental information. The link below provides a description of the background of the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) Update process and a description of the proposed project: http://www.sio2O35.com/images/library/luce nop 2013 12 05.pdf. SCOPING MEETING: The City will conduct a public scoping meeting in order to present the project and the EIR process and to receive public comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the EIR. This meeting will be held by the Planning Commission on: Wednesday, January 8, 2014, at 6 p.m. Council Chamber, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 For questions, please contact Kim Murry, Community Development Department, at: (805) 781-7274 or E-mail: kmurrya-slocity.org. More information is available on the project website: http://www.slo2035.com. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Agenda Forecast 4. Commission ADJOURNMENT Presenting Planners: Doug Davidson and Kim Murry usThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Please contact the City Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. city of Meeting Date: January 8, 2014 SAn Luis om spo Item Number: PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of a request for a Bar/Tavern use pennit for an existing non -alcohol serving night club (The Cellar, fonnerly known as Eye Candy) in the Historic Downtown Corunercial (C-D-H) zone. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1060 ❑sos Street FILE NUMBER: A 185-13 RECOMMENDATION Adopt attached resolution denying the Use Permit. SITE DATA Applicant Ryan Benedicto, owner of The Cellar Zoning C-D-H (Historic Downtown Commercial) General Plan General Retail Site Area —15,970 square feet Environmental Exempt from environmental Status review under Section 15270, Projects Which are Disapproved, of the CEQA Guidelines. BACKGROUND BY: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director tT-) (781-7177) e-mail: ddavidsonCslocity.org The applicant, Ryan Benedicto, is requesting to allow a bar/tavern within the existing night club, The Cellar, which operates at the subject property. A Use Permit is required for a bar/tavern to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses in the vicinity and to address any potential public safety issues. The Zoning Regulations define a bar/tavern as a business where alcoholic beverages are sold for on -site consumption, which are not part of a larger restaurant. At the discretion of the Community Development Director, an Administrative Use Pen -nit may be referred to the Planning Commission (MC 17.58.030.A3). The Community Development Director has referred this review to the Planning Commission given the concern of alcohol outlets in the downtown and potential associated impacts to the neighborhood. A 185-13 1060 Osos Paize 2 On April 20, 2012, a Night Club Use Permit was approved to allow a non -alcohol -serving night club at this location (Attachment 4). The applicant requested the Night Club Use Permit in order to provide a "high energy, dance-themed venue" that allows dancing, disc jockey performed music, and pre-recorded music, as well as food and a variety of non-alcoholic beverages. In October of 2013, the applicant requested a Director's Approval to hold two private catered events per month that serve alcohol in order to expand the business into an event rental space (Attachment 5). The request was denied based on findings, mainly because the catered events would produce another location for alcohol consumption downtown and skirt the regulations and process associated with a bar or tavern. SITE LOCATION The subject property is located at 1060 Osos Street (Attachment 1, Vicinity Map) in the Historic Downtown Commercial (C-D-H) zone. The property is bounded by Downtown Commercial zoning on all sides. Surrounding uses include retail, offices, financial services, and restaurants. PROJECT DESCRIPTION As mentioned above, a Night Club Use Permit was approved to allow a non -alcohol -serving night club, The Cellar, in April 2012. The permitted use allows for dancing, disc jockey performed music, and pre-recorded music within a night club that does not serve alcohol. The Cellar operates out of an existing building and contains approximately 1,500 square feet of dance floor, 850 square feet of lounge area, and a 130 square -foot stage (Attachment 3, Site Plan). The Cellar has a dress code; weekdays allow casual attire, prohibiting baseball hats, jerseys, shorts, distasteful t-shirts, and baggy or ripped jeans and on the weekends to require collared shirts for males and "stylish attire." The night club employs eight staff members; four of which include security personnel. Currently the venue is open from 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., Tuesday through Saturday. The applicant is requesting a bar/tavern Use Permit to open a bar that serves beer and wine within The Cellar. The applicant would like to use the space as a venue rental along with the continuing the use as a night club. The rental facility hours would be from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Monday through Sunday with amplified sound from 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. When not rented out for an event, the Night Club will be open to the public from 9:00 p.m. to 1:30 a.m., Monday through Sunday. The number of employees would increase to a total of nine with the addition of a bartender. The applicant will be applying for a new Type 42 (beer and wine) alcohol license which will require approval of a Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) from the City, in conjunction with the use permit. A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 3 ALCOHOL OUTLET AMENDMENTS (2012) AND ONE-YEAR REVIEW (2013) Over the last four years in a concerted effort, the City has collected information and developed strategies to reduce public safety problems and negative impacts associated with alcohol outlets. In October 2009, staff presented a study to the Council that correlated police -related incidents with alcohol outlets, along with several recommendations. The study, conducted by Dr. Fried Wittman of CLEW Associates, utilized a tool called Alcohol/Drug Sensitive Information Planning System in a Geographic Information System, or ASIPS/GIS. Staff received direction from the City Council to explore a range of strategies, improve local regulation, and engage a wide variety of stakeholders in the process. On November 16, 2010, staff provided an update to the Council on progress made in exploring these strategies and initiated a Nightlife Public Safety Assessment. The Nightlife Public Safety Assessment report was presented to Council in November, 2011. Council direction was to bring forth amendments to the Zoning Regulations that were intended to reduce public safety problems associated with alcohol outlets. On June 19, 2012, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 1578 to enhance alcohol outlet regulations including: 1. Revised zoning definition of restaurant and convenience store 2. A new restaurant zoning definition (late hour alcohol service — after 11:00 p.m.) 3. A zoning definition for liquor stores, and 4. An Administrative Use Permit process for restaurants with late hour alcohol service and liquor stores, and 5. A deemed approved ordinance to establish performance standards for existing alcohol outlets without use permits. On August 20, 2013, the Council held a study session to review the effectiveness of the 2012 Alcohol Outlet Amendments and considered a moratorium on new alcohol outlets in the downtown. The one-year update reviewed approvals of late hour alcohol serving restaurants, a nightclub, and status of the Deemed Approved Ordinance. A summary of the one-year review follows to give the Commission a sense of the recent activity downtown associated with alcohol outlets. Late Hour Alcohol Service — Restaurants Three administrative use permits were granted for late hour alcohol service in the downtown since August, 2012 when the Alcohol Amendments took effect: 1) - Eatz by Design on Higuera Street received administrative approval on December 21, 2012, to sell alcohol (beer and wine only) until 12:00 a.m. on weekends and 11:00 p.m. on weeknights. 2) - Sidecar Restaurant on Broad Street received administrative approval on February 15, 2013 to sell alcohol until 12:00 a.m. on weekends and 11:00 p.m. on weeknights. 3) - Turncoat Wine Company, in the Creamery, received administrative approval in the Creamery on March 1, 2013 to sell alcohol until 12:00 a.m. on weekends and 11:00 p.m. on weeknights. A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 4 These three requests were all approved under the condition that the restaurants continue to offer full menu service and not rearrange chairs and tables to morph into a bar or nightclub. Additionally, because each use was defined as a restaurant, only one additional hour of alcohol service on the weekends was approved for each business. It was the postings for the administrative use permits for late hour alcohol service on that caused some community concern, prompted the City Council to inquire about the recently revised regulatory approach and the number of outlets downtown, and to direct staff to return with information relevant to consideration of a moratorium. Nightclub Use Permit A nightclub Use Permit was approved for Creekside Brewery (1040 Broad St.) on August 2, 2013. The location of the nightclub area below -ground is a unique situation that mitigates any potential noise impacts. Recently enhanced standard conditions of approval, such as requiring queue control, security plan, manager on premises, and food available at all times were included in the approval. No changes were approved to the existing alcohol license. Deemed Approved Ordinance There have been no violations of the Deemed Approved Ordinance since its effective date in August, 2012. The fact of having the ordinance on the books has in itself gone a long way in preventing alcohol -related incidents. Also, the City's partnership with the Downtown Association in preparation and implementation of the ordinance has created an environment of working together towards compliance and maintaining the downtown as an attractive and safe place. The City Council did not adopt an urgency ordinance to enable enactment of a moratorium on new alcohol outlets downtown. There were concerns over making the required findings of a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare. Also, there was agreement to continue implementing the new, enhanced regulations and monitoring the effectiveness for longer than a one-year period. The new definitions, enhanced use permit conditions, late hour restaurant alcohol service process, and the Deemed Approved Ordinance provide an array of regulatory tools for alcohol outlets. Furthermore, the PCN process is an additional tool, especially important in regulating the number and concentration of alcohol licenses. A PCN is required for the subject application since it is a Type 42 license in the over concentrated downtown area. Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) — A Regulatory Tool for New Alcohol Outlets The PCN process provides another tool for the City to use in influencing the number of new liquor licenses issued by ABC. The PCN is an existing, more immediate tool of which the City can take advantage of for reviewing and approving requests for new liquor licenses downtown, including premise -to -premise transfers from outside to inside the over concentrated tract. As explained below, this tool is effective in limiting the number of new bar outlets in the downtown, but not the number of new restaurants serving alcohol. The City's new requirement for a use permit for restaurants serving alcohol past 11:00 p.m. was intended to address this loophole and A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 5 limit the "morphing" of bars into restaurants, while not placing an undue regulatory burden on establishing legitimate restaurants. The ABC is charged with the responsibility under State statute (B&P 23958.4) to review and issue licenses for the sale and/or manufacture of alcoholic beverages. State law provides that ABC shall deny an application for a bar/tavern license if the issuance of that license would either create a law enforcement problem, or result in, or add to an undue concentration of licenses, unless a determination is made by the governing City or County that public convenience or necessity would be served by issuance of the license. Under the state law, the applicant is allowed to demonstrate the public convenience or necessity for a restaurant liquor license without City approval. The City's new process for late hour alcohol service helps close this loophole by requiring a use permit for restaurants wishing to serve alcohol after 11:00 p.m. The table below shows the types of licenses that require a City -approved PCN and/or CUP (Conditional Use Permit). License Type PCN CUP Type 20 — Off -Sale Beer & Wine X Type 21 — Off -Sale Beer, Wine, and Spirits X X Type 40 — On -Sale Beer (Pub) X X Type 41- On Sale Beer & Wine (Restaurant) Type 41 — Late Hour Alcohol Service X Type 42 — On -Sale Beer & Wine (Bar) X X Type 47- On Sale General (Restaurant) Type 47 — Late Hour Alcohol Service X Type 48 — On -Sale Beer, Wine, and Spirits (Bar) X X Table 1: License Types by PCN and CUP The PCN rules apply to license requests in areas that are over concentrated and/or have high crime rates. Over concentrated is defined as more than one alcohol license for each 2,000 people per census tract and high crime rate as an area that exceeds the City's average crime rate by 20 percent. Table 2 below show the number/type of the six most common licenses in the downtown census tract 111.01, including two type 75 licenses (Brewery). Table 3 below is a map of the downtown census tracts with alcohol licenses depicted by type in their location. ABC uses census tracts for purposes of quantifying concentrations of alcohol licenses. The majority of alcohol licenses are in census tract 111.01 (Higuera Street and the downtown core). The census tract is over concentrated under ABC criteria. A 185-13 1060 Osos P a2e 6 1 Quantity &Type of Alcohol License for Census Tract III.OI 70 63.... 60 50........................................................................................................................................................ . Z40..................................._ 30 30 . 20 # of Licenses 20 .: ............................ _...-- 10 2 2 0 „arse.,,,,, _ ............... 40 41 42 47 48 75 Total "Type of Alcohol License Table 2: Quantity and Type of Alcohol Licenses in Census Tract 111,01 Cti a N w 2 ❑ 5� yd < J ci �e {41 S4 1 ;4}a• } • =41: 11f1.4 c0�o o 'C Go 23Ot; — d'' 112 91P � t ;41 J ,21 : r ,IQ G S� G 0 4 7� o 'Op Ire g gam,0..s r; s::., r,•, E'er R S1JJ � s�.. 1i 41, w SO 'rrvi ea c� P i 110.01 R Branch 5€a"e in Table 3: Alcohol Licenses Census Tract Map The above criterion to establish over concentration is not an absolute limit on the number of alcohol licenses in a given tract. ABC recognizes that jurisdictions often exceed the one license per 2,000 people ratio, particularly in college towns with compact downtowns, such as San Luis Obispo. The formula for over concentration provides a monitoring tool for cities and ABC to use when reviewing PCNs. A premise -to -premise transfer license within the downtown does not trigger a PCN since it is not a new license within the over concentrated tract (ABC interpretation of CA Business and A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 7 Professions Code Section 23958.4). The relocation of SLOBREW is the most recent example of this provision. However, a bar at a new location requires a use permit since use permits run with the land and are not transferable. The City's process with premise -to- premise bar license transfers within the downtown is to protest the transfer of license with ABC, which allows the pertinent conditions of the use permit to be placed on the license. This has been a common Police Department practice over the years and has been strengthened in recent meetings with ABC. Current PCN Process The City does not currently have a separate application process or a defined set of findings for approving PCNs. Currently a PCN is requested in writing from the business owner for a Community Development Director's action in the form of a letter and not subject to a public hearing or process. Community Development staff works closely with the Police Department in review of alcohol licenses and/or outlets. The Director's decision is appealable to the City Council. PCNs are rare in San Luis Obispo, since restaurant licenses and transfers within the downtown do not require City -approved PCNs. The most recent PCN request in the City is a June, 2009 request for off -sale beer and wine associated with Mission Chevron at 328 Marsh St. The Director denied the PCN due to over concentration of alcohol outlets in the downtown tract. On appeal, the Council denied the appeal, but directed staff to issue a PCN for off -site sales provided the applicant purchase another existing off -site license within City limits and that the PCN contain conditions of no single beer, no keg, and no small wine bottle sales. The Council decision was influenced by the fact that this business was some distance from the concentration of alcohol -selling establishments in the downtown core. The site's gateway location next to the freeway and major streets provided for public convenience. The redevelopment of the site and the associated public improvements were also an important ingredient in the Council's decision. ANALYSIS A liquor license for 1060 Osos St. would add a new bar/tavern downtown in conjunction with the existing night club use. The primary downtown census tract (111.01) has 63 licenses congregated in the downtown core between Nipomo Street and Santa Rosa. (The neighboring Tract 111.02 which includes part of the downtown is also over concentrated with a total of 20 licenses.) The majority (50) are restaurants licensed to serve alcohol. The growing number of restaurants morphing into bars late at night was the most serious problem identified in the 2012 Amendments process resulting in a new land use definition and use permit procedure. The burden of proof is on the applicant to prove the public convenience or necessity for a new bar/tavern license in the downtown. According to the applicant, the main purpose of proposed business model is to provide a rental space for private catered events, such as weddings and banquets. The proposed rental facility hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. with amplified music from 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. While there may be a need for downtown rental space for private gatherings, the facility would be open under similar hours when there are no private rental events. Although, the Director did not support the request for up to 24 events per year since it skirted the alcohol regulations and public process, there could be support for a limited A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 8 number of special private events at this facility, however, the open ended proposal effectually adds another alcohol outlet in the over concentrated downtown. Even if alcohol service could be limited to sporadic private parties, the existing use and layout of this space as a nightclub makes it difficult to regulate and enforce limits on the alcohol service and activities. The use permit for the Eye Candy nightclub (Attachment 4) was approved without public controversy due to the non-alcoholic nature of the use. The request for alcohol at this location associated with the nightclub use requires an entirely different focus for analysis. The City's intensive efforts over the last four years to enhance regulation of alcohol downtown, the state of over concentration, and the case for public convenience or necessity all must be taken into account. A new license downtown, particularly a bar/tavern use in conjunction with a nightclub, is not supportable in this context of review. CONCLUSION San Luis Obispo is far from alone in dealing with the public safety problems associated with alcohol outlets. The concerns in San Luis Obispo over the concentration and proliferation of alcohol outlets downtown resulted in a three-year community effort culminating in 2012 to enhance regulations for new outlets and establish performance standards for existing alcohol establishments. Continuing concerns over expansion of alcohol service downtown triggered a one-year review of the new regulations and a discussion over the possibility of establishing a moratorium in August, 2013. There is no moratorium on alcohol outlets downtown. The use permit process is a case -by -case review for restaurant with late hour alcohol service, bars, nightclubs, and license transfers within the downtown. In addition to the use permit, the higher test of the PCN must be proven by the applicant and approved by the City for new licenses downtown for bars/taverns. While a case could be made for a downtown rental facility with strictly limited alcohol service, a new bar/tavern, the 641h license downtown, in association with a nightclub compounds the state of over concentration and thwarts the City's recent progress in controlling the downtown alcohol environment. ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or project modifications required. 2. Direct staff to return with findings for approval of the project with specific direction on how the findings can be made. A 185-13 1060 Osos Page 9 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Vicinity map Attachment 2: Applicant project description Attachment 3: Project Plans Attachment 4: Use Permit 16-12 Attachment 5: Director's Action 144-13 Attachment 6: Resolution ATTACHMENT 1 WOE C-D-H C-D c -V - VICINITY MAP e�e H D A 185=1 6 1060 Osos Street C-D N ATTACHMENT November 12, 2013 TO: Deputy Director Doug Davidson FROM: Ryan Benedicto RE: 1060 Osos Street Administrative Use Permit Dear Mr. Davidson: I would like to apply for a night club use permit at The Cellar located at 1060 Osos Street with the ability to serve alcohol. Rental facility hours are available from Sam to 2am with amplified sound from 9pm to 2am. Total of 9 employees: manager, door cashier, bartender, DJ/sound technician, janitor, and up to 4 security guards. Layout and operations will remain the same as my former business, Eye Candy, including emergency exit plan and line cue. Public Convenience or Necessity: The Cellar will serve the community as an event facility available for rent --a niche underserved in the Downtown. No other business in the Downtown zone has a primary function as a community venue with dance floor space and allows for large groups, up to 360 occupants, on a full-time basis. My goal is to promote the Downtown as the social gathering and entertainment epicenter in San Luis Obispo where companies, organizations, and other local groups are able to meet or host events with optional live music and dancing. In my experience, potential banquet and wedding reception renters want to be able to serve alcohol during their celebration. The ability to serve alcohol is a necessity if I am to serve the community as a venue rental facility for social gatherings. I intend to purchase a Type 42. "On -Sale Beer & Wine for Public Premises" license from ABC for standard events. If the renter requires spirits to be served, I will then supplement the particular event with a Type 48 "On -Sale General for Public Premises" catering license from Bill's Place in Arroyo Grande up to 24 events a year each requiring Police approval. Please help my business fulfill a need and create a community facility in the Downtown. Kind Regards, Ryan Benedicto The Cellar SLO Blindside Promotions LLC Cell: 323-899-9214 Attachment 3 Hit ape}�Is, as ZI z III:5 0. 1 HIM 0-1 C, H, full 'I"HMN MINH 0 o I I 9 4 A 9 9 9 A 9 9 s 9 9 A 0 s 9 A 9 1 4 1 s 0 t v v g a ;NY I i C, a t, C) C, w z 01. M CCN, M 06 M OM 8 '15 is ------- io c, :E3 02 46, -,2 +14 - ------------ uj CD M M �o W4, g M 4, M -- ------ ----- -- 7E .-- — F- 4i o F-7-- t., UJ IM T 1101 jai 10 0. Lul 17, 06 1 01 r ATTACHMENT 4 city osAn IWS OBISPO Community Development Department • 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 April 25, 2012 Anthony Ryan Benedicto 845 S. Orange Drive Los Angeles, CA 90036 SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 16-12: 1060 Osos Street Dear Mr. Benedicto: On Friday, April 20, 2012, 1 conducted a public hearing on your request for a Use Permit to allow a non -alcohol -serving nightclub in the C-D-H zone, at the above location. After reviewing the information presented, I have approved your request, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings As conditioned, the use will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living or working in the vicinity because conditions on the use permit approval will minimize noise and crowd impacts as well as impacts to police resources and the community. 2. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which designates the project site as Downtown Commercial*(C-D). The City General Plan Land Use Element Policy 4.3, Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, states that "...Entertainment facilities, such as nightclubs and private theaters, should be in the downtown..." 3. The proposed project is consistent with General Plan policy to locate, at the street level, restaurants, stores, and other uses benefiting from and contributing to pedestrian traffic (LUE 4.16.1). 4. The proposed use is compatible with the project site and with existing and potential uses in the vicinity which include offices, retail shops, and restaurants. Conditions of approval have been adopted to minimize potential disturbances and criminal activities. 5. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review (Class 1, Section 15301, Existing Facilities, CEQA Guidelines). Conditions 1. Prior to establishment of the use, a building plan check submittal that is in full Oconformance with submitted project plans and the following conditions of approval The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to inc ude the disabled in all of Its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. A 16-12 (1060 Osos Street) Page 2 shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Department. 2. Prior to establishment of the use, a security plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Police Department. 3. Any new proposed signage shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to ensure appropriateness for the site and compliance with the Sign Regulations. 4. The windows facing Osos Street shall be maintained and not "walled -in" or darkened. 5. The proposed night club shall obtain a City of San Luis Obispo Business License prior to occupancy. 6. Anyone sharing space at the subject location shall obtain a City of San Luis Obispo Business license. 7. Night club operation shall not occur outside the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., Tuesday through Saturday. The hours of operation for the proposed use may be modified, subject to written approval of the Community Development Director. 8. Entertainment shall be limited to the types of entertainment indicated in the applicant's project description; disc jockey performed music and pre-recorded music. 9. The proposed use shall operate in conformance with the City's Noise Ordinance at all times. 10. The applicant shall make substantial efforts to minimize the potential for adverse noise and crowd impacts on adjacent establishments including, but not limited to, ensuring that all windows and doors are closed during night club operation. 11. To address complaints and minimize the need for police response to minor issues, an owner or manager shall be on premises at all times during night club operation, and shall be available to be contacted by a City representative and/or adjacent property owner or tenant. 12. The applicant shall provide security/safety training for staff members, and shall be responsible for ongoing security/safety training to accommodate changes in personnel. 13. The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. The applicant shall be responsible for managing outdoor crowds and queuing as a result of this use. An orderly line of patrons awaiting entry that does not block public access on, or use of, the sidewalk or street shall be maintained. A 16-12 (1060 Osos Street) Page 3 14. The .applicant shall maintain and operate a video recording system that records activity at all entrances and exits during all business hours. The video shall be of a quality suitable for later identification of customers and staff. It will be recorded in a manner that may be retrieved and provided to police immediately upon demand. Video data shall be retained for a minimum of 72 hours. 15. This permit is strictly limited to allow only the occupant load for the premises as is approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department. Occupant loads approved by the City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department shall be posted at all times. 16. This use permit shall be reviewed by the Administrative Hearing Officer if any complaints about noise, litter, traffic problems, disturbances, damage to property, injuries to persons, failure to cooperate with peace officers under circumstances related to the operation of this business, or incidents involving significant physical altercations or threats to public safety, or reasonable written complaint is received from any citizen or from the Police Department or upon receipt of evidence that the use is not in compliance with conditions of approval and the Municipal Code. At the time of the use permit review, to insure on -going compatibility between uses on the project site, conditions of approval may be added, deleted, or modified or the use permit may be revoked. The Hearing Officer may refer the complaint to the Planning Commission at his/her discretion. 17. Upon a significant change to the business model, as identified in the applicant's project description, the use permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director for compliance with conditions of approval or to determine whether a modification to the use permit is necessary. My decision is final unless appealed to .the Planning Commission within 10 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by the the may file an appeal. Appeal forms are available in the Community Development Department or on the City's website (www.slocity.org). The fee for filing an appeal is $261 and must accompany the appeal documentation. If you have any questions, please call Marcus Cadoni at (805) 781-7176. Sincerely, &"a" Doug Davidson Hearing Officer cc: SLO County Assessor's Office Sperry Flour, LLC 750 Pismo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ATTACHMENT 5 city Osari IUIS OBISPO Community Development Department • 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 October 29, 2013 Ryan Benedicio 1533 El Tigre Ct, Apt I San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 SUBJECT: 1060 Osos Street— DA 144-13 Request to have two catered events per month that serve alcohol Dear Mr. Benedicio: On October 25, 2013, 1 reviewed your proposal for Eye Candy SLO to hold up to two catered events per month that serve alcohol. The application indicates that the twice monthly events would be private rental events that wot.tld be held at 1060 Osos Street between the hours of 5 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. Alcohol outlets have been found to present health and safety issues for neighborhoods and communities. Research has shown that the number, density, location, and operational practices of alcohol outlets affects levels of community violence, drinking - driving incidents, injuries, under -age drinking, and public nuisance activities. Having large numbers of bars concentrated in a small geographic area is likely to cause disruption, particularly in a college town where alcohol outlets may promote heavy drinking. In 2008, according to the ASIPS study, 23% of police events in the City involved alcohol and, of those events resulting in arrests, about 50% were for alcohol offenses. Approximately 60% of alcohol events and almost half of the arrests occurred between 10:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. About 65% of arrests made in the downtown were alcohol - related and nine of the top ten alcohol outlets generating police events/arrests are in the downtown. The City Council directed staff to enhance local regulations of alcohol outlets. This direction has resulted in new conditions of approval for all new alcohol outlets, strengthened definitions of alcohol -related uses in the Zoning Code and regulating existing alcohol outlets via a "Deemed Approved" ordinance. The proposal for two catered events with alcohol services in this downtown location runs counter to the City's alcohol outlet policies. After careful consideration, I have denied your request, based on the following findings: The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. DA 144-13 (1060 Osos Street) Page 2 Findings The proposed event may harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living or working in the vicinity because the special events will function similarly to a bar or night club and have large numbers of people leaving the establishment at the close of the event, most likely during peak time, which will impact police resources and the community. 2. According to Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), downtown San Luis Obispo is "over concentrated" with its number of existing licenses; there are more alcohol outlets per capita in Downtown San Luis Obispo than what ABC would deem appropriate based on its criteria. 3. Although there is not another alcohol license being requested, the catered events would produce another location for alcohol sale/consumption downtown and skirt the regulations associated with a bar or tavern. 4. The catered events with alcohol will increase the total number of venues that sell alcohol downtown each month with specific potential to increase weekend late night public safety problems associated with alcohoj. 5: The availability or sale of alcohol is not consistent with the approved use permit for 1060 Osos Street to allow a non -alcohol -serving night club in the Commercial Downtown zone (A 16-12). 6. Monthly catered events with alcohol are not consistent with the 2012 Alcohol Outlet Amendments which enhanced regulations on alcohol outlets. 7. The purpose of the ABC single -day license is to allow entities to partake in the service of alcohol on a limited basis such as fundraiser for non -profits, community service opportunities, or annual public events. 8. The request for multiple single -day licenses for two occasions per month is not consistent with the intent of an ABC single -day license. My action is final unless appealed within 10 calendar days of the date of this letter. Anyone may appeal the action by submitting a letter to the Community Development Department within the time specified. The fee for filing an appeal is $273 and must accompany the appeal documentation. Appeals will be scheduled for the first available Planning Commission meeting date. If an appeal is filed, you will be notified by mail of the date and time of the hearing. If you have any questions regarding this letter, or if you need additional information about identified requirements, please contact Rachel Cohen at (805) 781-7194. DA 144-13 (1060 Osos Street) - Page 3 Sincerely, Doug Davidson, AICP Deputy Director of Community Development Development Review cc: Sperry Flour, LLC 750 Pismo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Attachment 6 RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A BAR/TAVERN USE PERMIT TO FOR THE CELLAR IN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ZONE (1060 OSOS STREET, A 185-13) 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 January 8, 2014, for the purpose of considering application #A 185-13; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission denies the use permit and makes the following findings: 1. The proposed use may harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people living or working in the vicinity because the proposed bar will contribute a net increase in the total number of bars/taverns in the downtown, which will impact police resources and the community. 2. According to Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), downtown San Luis Obispo is "over concentrated" with its number of existing licenses; adding a new liquor license, the 64th in downtown census tract 111.01, compounds the over concentration and increases the potential for additional public safety problems associated with alcohol. 3. The proposed bar/tavern would produce another location for alcohol sale/consumption downtown and increase the total number of venues that sell alcohol downtown with specific potential to increase late night public safety problems associated with alcohol. 4. There is no proven public convenience or necessity for the serving of alcohol at this location. 5. The sale of alcohol is not consistent with the approved use permit to allow a non -alcohol serving night club at this location. 6. A new bar/tavern liquor license in conjunction with the existing nightclub at this location is not consistent with the goals of the 2012 Alcohol Outlet Amendments to enhance regulations to address the public safety problems associated with alcohol use downtown. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-14 A 185-13 (1060 Osos Street) Page 2 Section 2. Environmental Review. Statutorily exempt under Section 15270, Projects Which Are Disapproved, of the CEQA Guidelines because CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. Section 3. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby deny Use Permit #A 185-13 based upon the above findings in Section 1 of the Planning Commission Resolution: On motion by , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this Bch day of January, 2014. Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission city Of Meeting Date: January 8, 2014 San WIS OBISPO Item Number:2, PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Public scoping meeting to discuss the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) being prepared for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update to the General Plan (GPI/ER 15- 12). PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide BY: Kim Murry, Deputy Director Phone Number: 781-7274 E-mail: kmurry@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: GPI/ER 15-12 FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director RECOMMENDATION: Receive public testimony and provide input to City and consultant staff on any additional workscope items or environmental issues that need to be evaluated in the Land Use and Circulation Elements update to the General Plan EIR. SITE DATA Applicant City of San Luis Obispo ~� Representative Kim Murry, Deputy Director �- Zoning Multiple�� -, General Plan Multiple 1 Site Area -11 square miles�-- ,� Application February 1, 2012 `" `ram Complete Environmental Environmental Impact Report to ' A Status be developed SUMMARY Land Use Element Update The Land Use Element represents a generalized blueprint for the future of the City of San Luis Obispo. Required by State law, it is the core of the General Plan. The Land Use Element sets forth a pattern for the orderly development of land within the City's planning area. The Element describes the expected level of population growth resulting from construction of the kinds of housing units included in the plan, as well as the kinds of new commercial and industrial development that are responsive to the City's economic needs. GPFER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 2 The City's Planning Area coincides with the County's San Luis Obispo Planning Area, and can be generally described as extending to the ridge of the Santa Lucia Mountains (Cuesta Ridge) on the north and east; the southerly end of the Edna Valley (northern Arroyo Grande Creek watershed boundary) on the southeast; the ridge of the Davenport Hills on the southwest; and the ridge of the Irish Hills, Turri Road in the Los Osos Valley, and Cuesta College in the Chorro Valley on the west. For the LUCE Update, the update of the Land Use Element focused primarily on a subset of the overall Planning Area. The geographic area addressed by the LUCE Update extends just beyond the city limits to incorporate the City's current Sphere of Influence, and is referred to as the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea. This is the area directly influenced by the urban form of the community and the land use designation and policy changes proposed as part of this Update. The City's first General Plan, including land use and other elements, was adopted in 1961. A revised plan was adopted in 1966, following the County's first adoption of a plan for the San Luis Obispo area in 1965. The City adopted major revisions of its Land Use Element in 1972 and in 1977 and 1994. Circulation Element Update While the Land Use Element describes the City's desired character and size, the Circulation Element describes how transportation will be provided in the community. This Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to other county areas and beyond. Transportation facilities and programs influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses, and the overall form of the City. While most Circulation Elements are auto - centric in focus, the City's Circulation Element Update will be truly multi -modal. The Update will include "Complete Streets" concepts — providing equal focus to movement by automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit. 1.0 BACKGROUND Proposed Physical Alternatives: This phase of the alternatives process started with City staff and the Consulting Team working together to identify locations that could be looked at as part of the LUCE Update. This included a review of existing plans, such as the City's Housing Element, Economic Development Strategy, and Capital Improvements Plan. Additional input on locations that should be evaluated was sought from the community, the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and the City Council. As the LUCE Update is a focused update, the intent was to concentrate on locations with the potential to accommodate change in land use type or intensity or areas in need of circulation improvements. For land use, most of the neighborhood areas were noted as "preserve and enhance" to indicate that changes will not be proposed relative to the existing General Plan Land Use Diagram. While the land use designations in these areas will not change, vacant lots in these areas will potentially develop, enhancements to properties will occur, and improvements to the community will move forward. GPI/ER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 3 The locations identified as areas of potential change (land use or circulation) were refined and one or more alternatives were developed for each location. Issues such as existing/proposed circulation patterns, type of adjacent land uses, neighborhood connections, and type and amount of land use were considered at each location. On October 15, 2013, the City Council held a public hearing to review land use and circulation alternatives that had been developed to date through the public process and the recommendations provided by the TF-LUCE and the Planning Commission concerning physical alternatives. At this meeting, the City Council adopted a Resolution of the City Of San Luis Obispo Endorsing the Physical Alternatives Set for the LUCE Update to be Considered Through the EIR Process (Resolutions 10466, 10467, and 10468). These physical alternatives comprise one part of the Proposed Project to be assessed in the LUCE Program EIR. Proposed Policy Changes: The Task Force considered the draft policy language in the Land Use and Circulation Elements over the course of 17 meetings. Their work was reviewed by the Planning Commission on the 121h and 161h of December 2013 and additional edits were recommended by the Commission for Council consideration. A new chapter titled Sustainability was added to the Land Use Element and a new chapter titled Multi -Modal Circulation was added to the Circulation Element. In addition to edits and updates to existing policies, new policies were added to both elements and are summarized below: New Land Use Element policies and programs • Sustainability- New section • Neighborhood wellness and enhancement • Compatibility criteria for development • Conversion of residential uses • Downtown residential and parking • Commercial revitalization • Downtown Concept Plan update • Downtown Plaza expansion • Airport area compatibility and safety • Airport Land Use Plan compatibility • Nightlife public safety • Annexation to Cal Poly analysis • Development fee program review • Delineation of development limit lines • Stormwater and drainage protection • Financing districts • Special focus areas New Circulation Element policies and programs • Multi -modal circulation- New section • Traffic reduction incentives and priorities • Regional transit center consolidation • Shuttle service evaluation • Bicycle Transportation Plan implementation GPI/ER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 4 • Bicycle parking • Bicycle Friendly Community designation • Regional bicycle network • Transportation funding, staffing, education and resources • Sidewalk installation • Downtown Pedestrian Plan implementation • Consolidated Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan consideration • Traffic access management, monitoring and compliance • Right of way acquisition • Growth management and roadway expansion • Vehicle speeds in residential neighborhoods • Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines update • Neighborhood Parking District Program update • Truck circulation • Neighborhood protection Additionally the EIR will consider the draft Broad Street Area Plan and the draft Downtown Pedestrian Plan. A draft of the latest version of the Land Use and Circulation Elements can be found on the project web site at www.slo2035.com. 2.0 COMMISSION'S PURVIEW The Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing proposed changes to the General Plan and for making recommendations to the City Council under Government Code section §65353. The City's environmental review process provides for a scoping meeting at Planning Commission when an EIR is being prepared. The Planning Commission is holding a hearing as a venue for the public and Commissioners to provide comments regarding topics or issues that should be evaluated in the Land Use and Circulation Elements update EIR. 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS A project schedule for review of the EIR will be provided to the Commission as soon as it is available. It will provide tentative dates for the preparation of different products and hearings related to the EIR. The dates are subject to change, but will give the Commission and public a tentative schedule and needed steps in the process. Copies of the Draft EIR would be distributed to the Commission at the end of the month in advance of regular agenda packets to allow adequate time for Commissioners to review the documents. 3.1 Environmental Review CEQA encourages and, in some cases, mandates early public consultation on projects where an EIR is being prepared. Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that at least one scoping meeting be held for projects of area -wide significance. Given the community -wide applicability of the policy and program updates to the Land Use and Circulation Elements, the project clearly meets GPFER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 5 the threshold of a project of area -wide significance. This Planning Commission hearing meets the requirement to hold a scoping meeting. In addition, EIR scoping comments were solicited at the Future Fair 3 workshop held on December 7, 2013. Comments received at that event are included as Attachment 1. With environmental documents, the word "scoping" is used to describe the process of obtaining information from the public and interested agencies on potential environmental issues associated with project development. As indicated in the attached Notice of Preparation (NOP — Attachment 2), this meeting is intended to allow the Planning Commission and public the opportunity to provide feedback on workscope items and to identify any other issues that may have been overlooked and may need to be analyzed in the EIR. It is also an opportunity to present information about the project review and CEQA process, to provide a preliminary presentation on the project, and for the public to ask specific questions about the project and what is proposed. This meeting is not intended to be a hearing on the merits of the project. That type of testimony would be applicable during hearings, which would occur after the Draft EIR has been published and staff has done a full analysis of project issues. The NOP was distributed to the State Clearinghouse for environmental documents in Sacramento as well as to local, state and federal agencies that might have jurisdiction over or interest in the project. It was also mailed out to local environmental groups, historical organizations, Native American groups and others that might be interested in the project. 3.2 Environmental Impact Analysis under the Programmatic EIR The CEQA Guidelines identify several types of EIRs, each applicable to different project circumstances. The proposed LUCE Update EIR will be prepared as a Program EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. Program EIRs are defined by Section 15168 as the environmental impact analysis of a series of actions that can be characterized as one large, related project. The program level analysis will consider the broad environmental effects of the proposed changes associated with the LUCE Update. The EIR will be used to evaluate subsequent projects (public and private) under the proposed Update consistent with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The Draft EIR will address potential significant impacts in several issue areas. The issue areas to be analyzed include the following (please refer to the attached NOP for a discussion of each impact issue area): • Aesthetics • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Geology and Soils • Public Services • Transportation and Circulation • Cumulative Impacts • Global Climate Change • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Noise • Population and Housing • Recreation • Utilities and Service Systems • Growth Inducing/CEQA Required Sections GPFER 15-12 (Citywide) Page 6 4.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Public Works staff has been directly involved in Task Force meetings and assisting in the update of the Circulation Element. All departments have contributed to the background reports and the review of update scope and information. 5.0 ALTERNATIVES Continue the hearing with specific direction to staff. 6.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Future Fair 3 NOP comments 2. Notice of Preparation (NOP) Attachment 1 i rI :■ h -W M N U 7 Q aJ L N v 4 o O O +, C � a E O L z o aJ c �C W E a O ° '> ° C v a, V aJ Q v aJ C i0 4- +, O C +� aJ C E C C O O C � WC M C aJ M CL L O 00 N O L aJ CL � O L _O O r•� Q CL �_ O L Z z C � o C Q ° Cu CL C 4- 0 m aJ w U O Z L aJ O U CU a O Q LJ O O 4- Ln fu 3 a C � 4 N t0Ln T N ° C � 4- 4- 0 O CU � W > `^ v +' U V 0 to 1 O c0 0 H cCo 4- V f0 Q E cn c a1 E C O .j O Q 0 C O .N 7 v f0 N v 3 N !0 � N O N aJ � v O N CL N d Y O z aJ � U +1 f0 C CL o E C •- O ro cn C E EL 0 C .O O U > N C cn a, aJ C a Cu O O � Q to fu °, E La L 0 Y aJ v N E o E Q O U a E Cu - C Ln aJ N N -� Q 0 N o co N Q a fu Z . U � v � O H a 4- U •- - > f�0 00 N Q 4- Cu 4- C N v E aJ 3 O C ov v= 3 C rm- N Q L !0 u L O CLL N "i L O o aJ O > i F ' V O LU 0 Z //!^0 V —. y 4- M -0° 3 � v � a, p o M O0 Q aJ = C) N 00 W > +� Co = .O cc: c�0 O O -0 M UP) i 4- O CL ai E *C:a, ' , >. a, z +' 00 o 00 -0 — L M aJ v= O M U O Z -a a n -0 E O can • L 3 O a, � O v ro O N (v !0 C .� v O a, n z > +J a, *J 3 � N E 3 N � C a`J 4- a, aJ aJ -0 E O t t a i— O 00 ° -0 4- Q Y Y aJ L L_ C aJ M C 3 C) -a aJ z M v o C y E 7 N +' Y Q -0 - C C �; aJ CLaii O C aa) = cp o O cn � on dA aJ H aL U !0 ci L > aJ 'N L aJ CLC 4+ Y C 4t `^ 'A-0 aJ > O CL = L 4- L -a '� U L Q M L -0 V aJ O M _a 0 O C !0 Q , Q C N C L M m r••� aJ N 4- 4J aJ o M " M J U N M N 4- - 3- M E �n 3 .E : a 0 v aEi E -a c 3 v M Mp C< o` n D N E 'ai A o O N aJ E v-0 L V N v a' cn LJ + 3� on �° o w N s o 3 C C !0 C 7 > ` > fD > 5 aJ ^ °C° c`o E v O ° aJ > 'on � t o`n V t aJ v +' Q -6 O 'O O to V o �! O O O O aJ C 7 C L aJ M aJ cn c � °O 0 O H 7 Co UP)Qj 4-G L y L _ i 3 } O D U o` vi \a Qj o o 4--0 O.^ Y v ai co N C aJ 00 V aJ a -O O O �•+ N on a E = - cn C 'L �C aNJ � 03 d L O ° v o on v L M N , aJ w o '3 t 'v O O a, O o 3 s 4- — a E O C 3 a CL4- � v H f 4 w U C f0 C f0 J t]A bo N C L C L `1 O N iT cr U f0 U f0 — 41 L L - N 41 O v a v aj I O N — O E _ E y C N .0 w ? Y ? f0 f0 f0 +1 -' Q O 41� L v v lf1 O 0-Q aj O to a Q Q C % V1 Q (/� in V1 " Q1 OIL L lf1 lf1 E ci OQ f0 Co C 41 C d > c E c ELO L to C 41 41 � U, 4-.% Q d Q d C � ? >--0C i N N Fo L N Q) 'O -0 �+ C)(n C (O p L �., L (I) ? d n C d Q H C d C y of cu in f0 C ? > ip2. E �.., d Q O C �• O aj L p co d n a C C +.+ U d L U C C � N C w Q t]U U y = tw O p 3 �o �, u c •C O c .c tCp m y C O L 41 C Q L in O � > N C C L O C bD C N x W d Q 7 O Vl i-� > d N N f0 41 f0 41 f0 41 x �, C O L a) d -C U Yp- c : N •N C .c C .c C .co C C d E �' O� N U C co C c p U - C C d d O L p L d m > L Y d J n p C p C i3 C aj Oc u O in L p N O Y d j M N "Q tH O > > L L U L y (I) 1_ rI O U -6 ti4 C (]A C ti4 C O aj 41 Co L O p w E � O -p cu c O— L C W i N C w C� i d s cn — N 41 tT tT c Q 3 c a m a -0 in J c ry 0 cu u C a1 �O s 0 n C >i O N O '_ B vi cuo O m t3 m i3 U Y t]p 41 aL+ � 7 � L � N U O 'B o f0Z of O N O +Q O O dc O cu c +' +LQ --Q z p M Q O =L � 7 s 0 QQ _ = Q = L aj ._C O -p u -p 41 u 7 i.+ .0 °2S O L .� O �• o L o � o +� Q Q OL O O 4- O c v c c0 U C)y O d 41 cu N C)c O 'O C L n - .0 O uA Q v ��+ O 41 c ry OL E v t11 u1 u1 -O cu L Q 4n,, r,4 O c e-4 �0 L -0 L Q in L H d 't3 N �' '� �+ d L Y L O f0 cu 41 L - aL-� L t]4 -a v v V1 L >, QJ N iT L cUq Q Q" Q 0- '- C '� t° c cco F— > F— .-i �° n rn 3 ° L 3 • • u 3 Attachment f0 � N d O 1O O N Q LJ 0- 0 N u v L Q C 41 0 3 co O .0 C U d � cu , O O U a E 3 0 t]o Q N O L L C L O 0- n 0-E co L o E 3 �' 'a o to v 41 w c C) Y u C f0 lfl d v1 � L Y > co O +� C > O cu a 41 3 L U W U O_ L f0 C --i rY E O Attachment 1 f O 3 • C rp O O > Co ai L E U O a) 4 L Ln M 4, O C Cr_ 0 O Q _0 co a L 3 � O Q Cr_ w ro a) a) >_ Q c a, � L Cr_ a) O Q E O 4� i) c� a) a) C G Ln a, E N i Ln aJ LL L- 4� C Y C � to C E 7 L C a) on L — O Q E O aJ L pn d Ln L bn = l0 CO i C C i) a Z w i G _0 N 'O -C 0 a) coo l0 O �• i Q Y Q LL Ln c Ln ro °' 3 O a C) +, a) 4 c 4'ro l0 U L4- C i O E O O Gn O O u ro Q Y J 0O a) C U .Q N U l0 L � -O y � Lnd OC tl O i a) i a) n +- 0 i U O 4- 0_ C d ro O d CO 4- i Q ELn Q (� Q 0 0 3 fO -0 s a-.' i C Gn 0 �+ 3 on ro O 3 c O O O L = -�- O co sl Gn 0 -0 ro l0 C ro O 0 — 0 O—EE Ln a) a- a-bn Ln ai .� E T 4- - +-' a) ~• i U C O u Y C a) O O O Ln O a) Y > O d rco O — d 0 LL ` U M W o-0 :3- Ln y a s r+- W 3 a �, z _ L a Attachment 2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2035 LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OFPREPARATION DATE: December 4, 2013 TO: State Clearinghouse, FROM: City of San Luis Obispo Concerned Agencies, Community Development Department Interested Parties 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) PROJECT TITLE: General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements Update LEAD AGENCY: City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department RESPONSES DUE BY: January 10, 2014 The City of San Luis Obispo (City) will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Elements Update. We need to know the views of your agency and members of the public as to the scope and content of the environmental information. For agencies please provide comments pertinent to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Refer to the attached discussion for a description of the background of the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) Update process and a description of the proposed project. In addition, further information on the LUCE Update process, draft element language and opportunities for project involvement can be found on the project web site: www.sio2O35.com SCOPING MEETING: The City will conduct a public scoping meeting in conjunction with this Notice of Preparation (NOP) in order to present the project and the EIR process and to receive public comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the EIR. This meeting will be held by the Planning Commission on: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 at 6 pm Council Chambers, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo CA 93401 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Attachment 2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION In addition, there will be an opportunity to provide scoping comments at a community workshop to be held: Saturday, December 7, 2013, 1:00 PM — 4:30 PM City -County Library Community Rooms 995 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 PLEASE provide us the following information at your earliest convenience, but not later than the 30-day comment period which will begin with your agency's receipt of the NOP. 1. NAME OF CONTACT PERSON. (Address and telephone number) 2. PERMIT(S) or APPROVAL(S) AUTHORITY. Please provide a summary description of these and send a copy of the relevant sections of legislation, regulatory guidance, etc. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION. What environmental information must be addressed in the Program EIR to enable your agency to use this documentation as a basis for your permit issuance or approval? 4. ALTERNATIVES. What alternatives does your agency recommend be analyzed in equivalent level of detail with those listed below? 5. RELEVANT INFORMATION. Please provide references for any available, appropriate documentation you believe may be useful to the City in preparing the Program EIR. 6. FURTHER COMMENTS. Please provide any further comments or information that will help the City to scope the document and determine the appropriate level of environmental assessment. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date, but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Your responses will be included in the City record for this project. Please send your response before January 10, 2014 to Kim Murry at the following address: Kim Murry, Deputy Director Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 bw "�� 12-4-13 Signature Date Kim Murry, Deputy Director Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Telephone: (805) 781-7274 FAX: (805) 781-7173 Email: kmurry@slocity.org Reference: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15082. Attachment 2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION Attachment 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION CITY SAN LUIS OBISPO NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS UPDATE 1. Project Title City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (LUCE Update) 2. Lead Agency City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person Kim Murry Deputy Director, Long -Range Planning (805) 781-7274 e-mail: kmurry(abslocity.org 4. Project Website For project information, please see www.slo2035.com 5. Scoping Meeting The City will conduct a public scoping meeting in conjunction with this Notice of Preparation (NOP) in order to present the project and the EIR process and to receive public comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the EIR. This meeting will be held by the Planning Commission on: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 at 6 pm Council Chambers, City Hall 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo CA 93401 In addition, there will be an opportunity to provide scoping comments at a community workshop (Future Fair 3) to be held: Saturday, December 7, 2013, 1:00 PM - 4:30 PM City -County Library Community Rooms 995 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 City of San Luis Obispo 1 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachment City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Future Fair 3 will be a chance to see, review, and discuss the changes that are being proposed as part of the General Plan Update. City staff and the EIR consultant will be available to discuss the scope of the proposed Program EIR and to take input from the public on the Program EIR process and to answer any questions the public may have. The scoping meeting is provided to satisfy the requirements of the Public Resources Code, §21083.9, that require a Lead Agency to call at least one scoping meeting for a project such as the Draft 2035 LUCE Update. Interested persons should contact Kim Murry, Deputy Director, City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, at (805) 781-7274 if they have questions, or if they need information on additional locations where the documents can be accessed. 6. Project Location The City of San Luis Obispo is situated in the Central Coast Region of California along U.S. Highway 101, about 230 miles south of San Francisco and 190 miles north of Los Angeles (see Figure 1). Its coastal location is characterized by a mild Mediterranean climate that is moderated by the influence of the Pacific Ocean. The city is nestled about 10 miles inland from the coast in a narrow valley between the Santa Lucia Mountains and volcanic hills reaching up to 3,000 feet. The city is surrounded by agriculture and open space, including vineyards, field crops, oak woodland, and grasslands. While the area has several creeks, San Luis Obispo Creek bisects the town and is a defining feature of the traditional, pedestrian -oriented downtown district. The City's General Plan addresses a Planning Area that extends beyond the current San Luis Obispo city limits (see Figure 2). As defined by the California General Plan Guidelines (2003), a Planning Area typically "Encompasses incorporated and unincorporated territory bearing a relation to the city's planning. The planning area may extend beyond the sphere of influence." While the LUCE Update includes the complete Planning Area, changes in land use and circulation alternatives focused on a smaller, urbanized core area referred to as the LUCE Sphere of Influence Planning Subarea (LUCE SOI Planning Subarea). This smaller area is shown on Figure 3. 7. General Plan Elements Effected The Proposed Project is an update to the City's LUCE. ■ The Land Use Element designates the general location and intensity of housing, business, industry, open space, education, public buildings and facilities, and other land uses. It helps guide neighborhood preservation, revitalization, and enhancement and protects environmental resources. The Circulation Element includes goals and policies relating to how residents, products and visitors move around San Luis Obispo. This element addresses cars, bicycles, pedestrians, air, rail, and public transportation. As part of the Update, small changes in the definition of the designations are expected and specific sites will be evaluated for changes to their current designations (see Section 9, Project Description). Other elements of the City's General Plan will be reviewed and edited as necessary to remain consistent with any updates or changes that are made to the LUCE, but these changes are expected to be minor. State law requires this "internal consistency" so that each element supports and complements the others to achieve the community's goals. City of San Luis Obispo 2 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Affachiment City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION ,• i Fresno County i Tulare County Monterey County ? ,•' f Kings County i San Antonio �� 1 Recreation Area I � � 1 o, 's "—', Kern County San Luis Obispo County Montana de Oro State Park Pacific Ocean Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area t f _ 1 Santa Barbara County •, i Los Padres National Forest i � I ` Lake Cachuma -ti Recreational Area _ 1 � Legend San Luis Obispo City Limits j _ ? County Boundaries Interstate 2035 �J Planning Area City 1 Community US Highway o s ,a 0 LUCE Sol Planning Subarea Park 1 Forest Elm � Miles sa.— City of San Luis Obispo 3 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Affachrincrit 2 City of Sari Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION City of San Luis Obispo 4 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP City of Son Luis Obispo Attachmc,,-nit NOTICE OF PREPARATION o, KERNAVE a �Q � 10t q,� pp .: HIGHLAND OFN �r9 9,y E Oyc CERRO ROMALILDO .� •�•� 9L , FOO 4, mAti a HILL $LVD MORA DR FREOERMS ST ' LONE CA 15R p T07 N •L.�.. x a c� yam... � � O 5� '[ HfGH$T pw� SQL 1111 ST Lrsr vs3'qq MONY E4LAWAy ;;.r STN�RI.j ❑ VTTRD O OJAI yy Q y sp 0I iq AVE .• / 4g h MEl55NEli 0� o = 1RONBARR 57 2 TANK FARM6 D TANK FARM RD VOLDENROO L YNRAOR� BOO IgT C• BUCKLEY + Y' t .BVCKi: 0 p 3 wow 77 �i[ q I $ x FVANS RD 2 E�. (s Ram Legend LUCE SOI Area Water Body Streets 20_l City Limits Highway I\w" Railroad /\,/ Major Road + Airport an_.:v .,n. z7 irtn• i.ws Okaf¢ l 0 o.s l Miles City of Son Luis Obispo 5 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachment 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION 8. Zoning Designations Effected Multiple designations. Future rezoning may be required for General Plan consistency and implementation for the sites evaluated and modified as part of this LUCE Update (see Section 9, Project Description). 9. Project Description The City's General Plan guides the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. It reflects consensus and compromise among a wide diversity of citizens' preferences, within a framework set by State law. The General Plan is published in separately adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. Land Use Element Update The Land Use Element represents a generalized blueprint for the future of the City of San Luis Obispo. Required by State law, it is the core of the General Plan. The Land Use Element sets forth a pattern for the orderly development of land within the City's planning area. This pattern should be based on residents' preference and on protection of natural assets unique to the planning area. The Element also describes the expected level of population growth resulting from construction of the kinds of housing units included in the plan, as well as the kinds of new commercial and industrial development that are responsive to the City's economic needs. The City's Planning Area coincides with the County's San Luis Obispo Planning Area (Figure 2), and can be generally described as extending to the ridge of the Santa Lucia Mountains (Cuesta Ridge) on the north and east; the southerly end of the Edna Valley (northern Arroyo Grande Creek watershed boundary) on the southeast; the ridge of the Davenport Hills on the southwest; and the ridge of the Irish Hills, Turri Road in the Los Osos Valley, and Cuesta College in the Chorro Valley on the west. For the LUCE Update, the update of the Land Use Element focused primarily on a subset of the overall Planning Area. The geographic area primarily addressed by the LUCE Update extends beyond the city limits to incorporate the City's current Sphere of Influence, and is referred to as the LUCE SOI Planning Subarea (see Figure 3). This is the area directly influenced by the urban form of the community and the land use designation changes proposed as part of this Update. The City's first General Plan, including land use and other elements, was adopted in 1961. A revised plan was adopted in 1966, following the County's first adoption of a plan for the San Luis Obispo area in 1965. The City adopted major revisions of its Land Use Element in 1972 and in 1977 and 1994. Circulation Element Update While the Land Use Element describes the City's desired character and size, the Circulation Element describes how transportation will be provided in the community. This Circulation Element Update describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to other county areas and beyond. Transportation facilities and programs influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses, and the overall form of the City. While the current Circulation Element is auto -centric in focus, the City's Circulation Element Update transitions to a more multi -modal approach. The Update will include "Complete Streets" concepts - providing equal focus to movement by automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit. City of San Luis Obispo 6 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP A, ttachment r City of San Luis Obispo Update Overview NOTICE OF PREPARATION The City was successful in obtaining a Sustainable Communities Grant through the Strategic Growth Council (SGC). Several objectives were identified by the grant and the final LUCE Update product is anticipated to contain policy recommendations that are based on the following. ■ Community input regarding the physical, social, economic, cultural and environmental character of the city in order to develop a vision of San Luis Obispo through the year 2035; ■ A comprehensive guide for decision -making based on land use, design, circulation and access, sustainability and the preservation of the quality of life in the community; ■ Policies that balance development and conservation to preserve the City's natural beauty, unique character and heritage while supporting housing opportunities, a vibrant economy and addressing disadvantaged communities; ■ Evaluation of consistency with the Regional Blueprint and policies that guide development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy in collaboration with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG); ■ Opportunities to create a "Complete Streets" circulation system (multi -modal system); ■ Identification of areas appropriate for residential infill and densification; ■ Identification of the circulation system that is needed to appropriately balance the community's values and desired growth; ■ Identification of programs to help migrate to transportation modes other than the single occupant vehicle; ■ Identification of transit opportunities that may be enhanced to accommodate Transit Oriented Developments (TOD); ■ Identification of ways to achieve more affordable housing; and ■ Promotion of energy efficiency & conservation and incorporating Climate Action Plan strategies. In addition to the grant objectives (as developed by the City), the LUCE Update and associated Program EIR will also address the following. ■ South Broad Street Corridor Plan: The LUCE Update will incorporate an area plan that addresses residential infill and enhancement of an area of the City currently zoned for commercial service and manufacturing uses. The Program EIR will incorporate this plan into the project description of the LUCE Update. ■ Healthy Cities Initiatives: The LUCE Update will explore healthy cities initiatives and the link between health and land use planning. ■ Pedestrian Circulation Plan: The LUCE Update will include development of a Pedestrian Circulation Plan for the Downtown as part of the Circulation Element update. ■ Nightlife Public Safety Assessment: The LUCE Update will evaluate type, density, and capacity of various types of alcohol and late -night entertainment establishments that are desirable for the downtown and develop policies to support those findings. ■ Airport Issues: The LUCE Update will include an updated technical assessment of safety zones around the airport and proposed policy language to promote the use and development of the airport while protecting the health, safety and welfare of the community. ■ Traffic Congestion Relief: The LUCE Update will continue to seek ways to address traffic congestion through efforts such as street modifications, intersection improvements, pedestrian improvements, bicycle facilities, sidewalks, trip reduction programs, traffic signal operations, Los Osos Valley Road interchange, Prado Road construction, and public transit. ■ Other Transportation Issues: The Circulation Element Update shall incorporate multi -modal levels of service standards for all modes of transportation including pedestrians, bicycles, and transit. The update shall comply with current regulations such as the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 incorporating pedestrian, bicycle, and transit level of service standards in addition to Complete Streets policies. City of San Luis Obispo 7 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachment 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION ■ LAFCO Sphere of Influence Areas: LAFCO has identified sphere of influence areas for the City of San Luis Obispo. These areas will be reviewed for their development potential. Development of LUCE Update Alternatives The result of the review and implementation of the preliminary program discussed above is the drafting of the Land Use Element and Circulation Element alternatives to be presented to City decision makers for their consideration, review and ultimate adoption. The alternatives under consideration have been developed based on the ideas and concepts provided by the public (during previous community workshops / Future Fair events, online interactions, public meetings and a community -wide survey) and with the guidance of the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements Update (TF-LUCE) - a residents' committee established by the City Council to assist in the LUCE Update. For the City of San Luis Obispo, the alternatives process is a focused approach that looks at small adjustments that sustain an already desirable community form. The development of alternatives for San Luis Obispo is a two-step process: proposed physical alternatives and proposed policy changes. Proposed Physical Alternatives: This phase of the alternatives process started with City staff and the Consulting Team working together to identify locations that could be looked at as part of the LUCE Update. This included a review of existing plans, such as the City's Housing Element, Economic Development Strategy, and Capital Improvements Plan. Additional input on locations that should be evaluated was sought from the community, the TF-LUCE, Planning Commission, and the City Council. As the LUCE Update is a focused update, the intent was to concentrate on locations with the potential to accommodate change in land use type or intensity or areas in need of circulation improvements. For land use, most of the neighborhood areas were noted as "preserve and enhance" to indicate that changes will not be proposed relative to the existing General Plan Land Use Diagram (see Figure 4). While the land use designations in these areas will not change, vacant lots in these areas will potentially develop, enhancements to properties will occur, and improvements to the community will move forward. The locations identified as areas of potential change (land use or circulation) were refined and one or more alternatives were developed for each location. Four of the locations identified (Avila Ranch, Foothill / Santa Rosa area, Dalidio / Madonna Road area, and the General Hospital property) were featured at the December 1, 2012 Community Workshop. At the workshop, participants were also asked to weigh in on the future of the Downtown area and to help identify other areas that should be considered for land use changes. For circulation, participants provided input on bike system improvements and locations that should be addressed in the LUCE Update. Context was important when developing alternatives. Issues such as existing/proposed circulation patterns, type of adjacent land uses, neighborhood connections, and type and amount of land use were considered at each location. The alternatives will continue to be reviewed and refined throughout the LUCE process. See Figure 4 for a map of all locations put forward for potential land use or circulation changes. On October 15, 2013, the City Council held a public hearing to review land use and circulation alternatives that had been developed to date through the public process and the recommendations provided by the TF-LUCE and the Planning Commission concerning physical alternatives. At this meeting, the City Council adopted a Resolution of the City Of San Luis Obispo Endorsing the Physical Alternatives Set for the LUCE Update to be Considered Through the EIR Process (Resolutions 10466, 10467, and 10468). These physical alternatives comprise one part of the Proposed Project to be assessed in the LUCE Program EIR (see Tables 1 and 2). City of San Luis Obispo 8 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Atta,ichmcn,t City of San Luis Obispo <A. KERNPVE 1 NOTICE OF PREPARATION T q �o cfr�NpD� X ti11 ��9F y1 CRAIG WAY ti4 FOQTHILL BLVU � BOND S7 . r. .� .406" Np ... . ONAAR O N 21 N. A -p� o� S Cis , HIGH .. STQ .5�. .. s�aE y`Spq �s0A.pQ HA MONY OJAI Margarita !' arcutt 61 MEISSNEFi � "' �i HIND �• CU?- IRGNBARk ST TANK FARh ? TANI( FA M RD R Airport Area � ``_.._ �o I�L. � J � r •sue / 5 3 ❑ z p{tVVE�F' � w �r w Legend LUCE SCI Area Specific Plan Area 2035Area of Potenlial Preserve and Enhance L� Land Use Change City Limits �� C'vwlatian Potential Change ' J BIJOKLE 6 ❑ �� x W y� 41 g X 4 EVANS RD � ys w ' h Voter Body I^V Railroad Highway + Airport (� V Major Road 0 0.5 1 Miles City of San tuis Obispo 9 Land Use and Circulation Elements update NOP Attachri.,,.,c-iat City of Son Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Table 1. Land Use Alternatives Being Considered A Nativity Church Site Removed from consideration. B Foothill @ Santa Rosa Area Consider mixed use for the area on both sides of Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa. Consider both horizontal and vertical mixed use. Emphasis on retail and housing near campus. Policies to support consideration of parking and height changes to facilitate mixed use. C Pacheco Elementary Site Removed from consideration. D Diocese Site near Bressi PI. & Broad St. Removed from consideration. E Upper Monterey Area No physical land use changes proposed. F Downtown Area No physical land use changes proposed. G Mid-Higuera Area No physical land use changes proposed. H Caltrans Site Mixed use to include tourist commercial, office and some residential as shown in H-2 and H-4. Site may be appropriate to review height limit changes to accommodate desired development. Consider more public open space uses to serve as gateway and uses compatible with conference center. I General Hospital Site Support additional residential development on the site behind existing structure but delete the residential development proposed between the URL and the City limit line currently designated OS. Policies should support flexibility so that a range of residential uses can be considered (i.e. residential care, adjunct to transitional care use, other residential uses consistent with area). J Broad Street Area Incorporate physical alternative described in South Broad Street Area Plan endorsed by September 17, 2013 by City Council (Council Resolution 10460). K Sunset Drive -In Site Support consideration of mixed use. Develop policies to address appropriate mix of uses. Policy discussion should address historic nature of Sunset Drive -In and ensure site can still accommodate Homeless Services center. Provide bike connections as called for in bicycle transportation plan. L Dalidio / Madonna Area Support consideration of a mix of uses through LUE policies with significant open space/agricultural (at least 50%) component. Alt. L5 without specific direction of particular sizes or shapes. Residential component to be consistent with applicable airport policies. M Pacific Beach Site Policy development to support consideration of Commercial Retail fronting LOVR and Froom Ranch and park to serve neighborhood. N Calle Joaquin Auto Sales Area Support consideration of mixed use in the context with the Dalidio property and the City's agricultural parcel and focus on connectivity to the neighborhoods to the north. Develop policies to address appropriate mix of uses. City of San Luis Obispo 10 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Aflacimacint City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION O Madonna Site on LOVR Support consideration of policies to address future development. These should include viewshed, hillside and open space protection, potential height limits, wetland protection, access to other connections, historic farm buildings, mixed use to accommodate workforce housing, and neighborhood commercial type uses. Develop policies to address appropriate mix of uses. P LOVR Creekside Area Support consideration of a modified Alternative P-5 with medium high density residential infill housing with open space. Q Margarita Specific Plan Policy to support consideration of changes to MASP to allow increased density on eastern portion of MASP area, R Broad St. @ Tank Farm Rd. Site Support consideration of a mix of commercial uses with limited residential on upper floors. Commercial uses should serve the surrounding businesses and bicycle and pedestrian connectivity must be addressed. S Avila Ranch Support consideration of a mix of residential densities, connection to shops to the north, connection to S. Higuera and a mix of uses similar to what is shown in owners' concept. Respect creek/wildlife corridor. Develop policies to direct future development. Table 2. Circulation Alternatives Being Considered 1 Boysen Ave. and Santa Rosa St. Support consideration of separated crossing for bikes/pedestrians of Santa Rosa at Boysen. Consider all vehicular alternatives for Boysen intersection at SR 1 including full closure, access restrictions, and retaining its current configuration. 2 Realign Chorro St., Boysen Ave., and Broad St. Support consideration of alternative 2-3 realignment of Chorro and Broad and Boysen. 3 Potential Ramp Closures at Highway 101 and State Route 1 Support consideration of alternative 3-2 ramp closures and consolidated SR1/Highway 101 interchange for further evaluation including impacts to residential streets and the need for a signage/way-finding program. 4 Broad St. and Highway 101 Ramp Closures Support consideration of alternative 4-2 ramp closures at Broad with the addition of bike and pedestrian overpass. 5 Convert Marsh St. and Higuera St. to Two-way (Santa Rosa St. to California Blvd.) Support consideration of two way vehicular circulation of Marsh and Higuera between Santa Rosa and California. 6 Transit Center Location on Santa Rosa St. and Higuera St. Support consideration of site/block of Higuera/Santa Rosa/Monterey for the transit center location and consider use of both public and private property. Include ideas from student projects and the Downtown Concept Plan. City of San Luis Obispo 11 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP City of San Luis Obispo Ait, t a c I i P . NOTICE OF PREPARATION 7 Mission Plaza "Dog Leg" Support consideration of alternatives 7-2 and 7-3 (varying degrees of streets affected). Analyze full closure of roadways. Develop policy direction regarding desired outcomes and nature and phasing of treatment for the area. 8 Realign Bianchi Ln. and Pismo St. Support consideration of alternative 8-3, realignment of street intersection (Pismo to Bianchi). 9 Realign Madonna Rd. to Bridge St Instead of Higuera St. Consider appropriate connection from Madonna to S. Higuera in concert with redevelopment of Caltrans site. Potential to realign Madonna to connect with Bridge Street may better address some pedestrian and bike connections. 10 Bishop St. Extension Evaluate elimination of Bishop Street bridge over railroad tracks and consider road diet for Johnson Ave. 11 Victoria Ave. Connection to Emily St. Support consideration of Victoria connection to Emily. 12 Broad St. — Consolidate Access Support consideration of Broad Street consolidation of access points. 13 Orcutt Rd. Overpass Keep facility as part of Circulation Element. Do not consider removing facility due to concerns about increasing rail traffic. 14 Froom Rd. Connection to Oceanaire Neighborhood Provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity only. is Prado Rd. Interchange vs. Overpass Evaluate both interchange and overpass 16 Connections to Dalidio Dr. from Froom Ranch Way and/or Calle Joaquin Evaluate whether one or more connections are needed to provide an additional connection between LOVR and Prado/Dalidio; whether an internal east -west or loop road is needed to connect these roads on the Dalidio property; and minimizing impact of road extensions on AG/OS land. 17 Realign Vachel Ln. Support consideration of alternative 17-2 Vachel to Higuera connection as a "back up" alternative in the event Buckley Road does not connect to S. Higuera. 18 North -South Connection between Tank Farm Rd. and Buckley Rd. Support consideration of alternative 18-2 creating a north -south connection between Tank Farm and Buckley for future connectivity. 19 Buckley Rd. to LOVR Connections Support consideration of alternatives 19-2 (Buckley to Higuera) and 19-3 (Higuera to LOVR behind Los Verdes - 101 bypass) City of San Luis Obispo 12 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachant 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Proposed Po/icy Changes: As part of the LUCE Update, City staff, working with the Consulting Team, conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the existing goals, policies, and implementation programs that make up the current LUCE. This evaluation, presented in a matrix format, was used when reviewing the alternatives and existing LUCE policies. Existing policy was reviewed using the following criteria. ■ Execution. Was the intent met or implemented? ■ Clarity. Does it provide clear direction to staff, decision makers, and other users? ■ Progress. Was this monitored or capable of being monitored. ■ Outcome. Did this have the desired results? ■ Current. Does this adequately address current vision, issues, opportunities, or City direction? ■ Continuation. Should this be continued in the updated General Plan? ■ Modification. How should this be modified? ■ Other Comments. Notes for consideration as part of the LUCE Update. This step also looked at the addition of new policy language that may be needed to: ■ address notable policy gaps (missing policies) that have been identified over time in the existing General Plan; ■ address other new policy areas identified thru the public process; ■ add policy topics to respond to changes in State law, like policies on global warming and complete streets; and ■ address items described in the Sustainable Communities grant that is funding this update. As part of the project scope for the LUCE Update, new policy considerations noted by the City included: ■ Neighborhood Wellness ■ South Broad Street Corridor area ■ Healthy Cities Initiatives ■ Pedestrian Circulation Plan ■ Consistency with San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) efforts ■ Nightlife Public Safety Assessment ■ Airport Issues ■ Traffic Congestion Relief ■ Other Transportation Issues ■ LAFCO Sphere of Influence Areas At the time of the publishing of the NOP, policy changes were still in review by the TF-LUCE, and are scheduled to be forwarded to the Planning Commission in December 2013 and City Council in January 2014. The City Council is expected to make a recommendation on the proposed policy changes that will be part of the Proposed Project (in addition to the physical alternatives identified in October 2013). Capacity for Growth As background for considering land use and circulation alternatives, it is important to understand current conditions and likely trends into the future, with a particular focus on projected land demand and the availability of land in the City and surrounding area to satisfy that demand. According to recent projections prepared by the SLOCOG, the City of San Luis Obispo is projected to grow in population from approximately 44,000 in 2010 to 49,000 in 2035, an increase of approximately 5,000 persons in 25 years. During the same period, the City of San Luis Obispo's housing stock is projected to grow by 2,651 units. City of San Luis Obispo 13 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachment City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION SLOCOG has also projected that the City of San Luis Obispo will grow its job base from 33,000 jobs in 2010 to 42,400 jobs in 2035, an increase of 9,400 jobs in 25 years. This roughly translates into demand for an additional 5 million square feet of floor area, approximately a quarter of which would be retail development. These demand numbers need to be compared to the existing and planned supply of land available to meet this demand, including planned and approved projects, specific plans, and vacant land. The City has approved three specific plans (Margarita Area, Airport Area, and Orcutt Area). If built out as adopted, these specific plan areas would provide for 3,496,642 total square feet of new non-residential floor area (575,954 square feet of this would be new retail floor area), 1,847 new housing units, and provide for 6,358 new jobs. Outside of these specific plans, the City has also approved projects with the potential to provide 390 new housing units and 99,000 square feet of retail floor area. After subtracting the vacant land already involved in planned and approved projects and land within the three specific plan areas, the City can expect approximately 730 new units of residential development and 1,258,112 square feet of non-residential development from vacant land. Draft LUCE Update As a result of the efforts discussed above, through input from the public and the TF-LUCE, and with direction from the City Planning Commission and City Council, the draft LUCE have been created as working documents to be refined through further public participation and ultimately finalized through adoption by the City Council. Full copies of the working drafts of the preferred physical and policy alternatives will be posted to the project website at www.slo2035.com. In addition, the project website also has the following available for the public: ■ Project information and overview and purpose of the General Plan and Program EIR; ■ Listing of all meetings; ■ All presentations and materials produced for public meetings and workshops; ■ Fact sheets regarding the planning process; ■ All drafts and materials produced for the Plan and the Program EIR; and ■ Library with all relevant documents. The City has been working with the community on the development of the LUCE Update. A complete public draft is expected to be made available to the public in the first quarter of 2013 with the Draft Program EIR following soon after. All materials will be posted on the internet at the project website (www.slo2035.com). Hard copies of the Draft Program EIR will be available for review at the City Community Development Department (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA) and the City/County Library (995 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA). 10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND DECISION MAKING OVERVIEW The City has committed to designing a comprehensive and inclusive public participation program for the development of the LUCE Update. The goal is to ensure that by the time the project begins the final adoption process, members of the public have had the opportunity to take an active role in the development of the LUCE Update. In order to facilitate this process, the City is taking full advantage of multi -media promotions using public service announcements at local movie theatres, an informative project web site, and social networking involving outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare and Mind Mixer. City of San Luis Obispo 14 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachment 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Public Workshops: The City has, and will continue to host a comprehensive set of public workshop, and is encouraging any interested parties or agency representatives to participate to get their voice shared and their concerns addressed. The following is a summary of the public workshops and Future Fairs to date and upcoming opportunities to attend future workshops: ■ May 16, 2012. The first public workshop focused on identifying San Luis Obispo neighborhoods, what makes them special, and what can be done to make them better. ■ September 27, 2012. The objective of the workshop was to collect/refine community input on issues and opportunities associated with six key topic areas. This information will be used to guide development of alternatives in later phases. The six topics were developed based on the community survey, neighborhood workshops and TF-LUCE inputs. The six topic areas were: 1) Creative Reuse of Land, 2) Downtown, 3) Motorized Circulation, 4) Non -Motorized Circulation, 5) New Growth Areas, and 6) Community Amenities. ■ December 1, 2012. Future Fair 1. This was the kick off for the first Future Fair and was designed to 1) get community input on the principles that will guide the update, 2) get thoughts on how to "reimagine" the future of several key sites around the community, and 3) get input on circulation improvements and priorities. The input will be used to develop a set of alternatives that will be used to guide the development of the General Plan Update and improve and enhance our community. ■ June 1, 2013. Future Fair 2. This community workshop was designed to provide an overview of the land use and circulation alternatives that have been developed for consideration and to get community input on these alternatives. The workshop also featured a station designed to gain input on Complete Street priorities and transit use. The input will be used in the development of a Preferred Alternative that will be used to guide the development of the General Plan Update. ■ December 7, 2013. Future Fair 3 (Upcoming). The past two Future Fair events have been held to get the public's help in defining the course for the City's General Plan Update. Future Fair 3 (lpm to 5pm, City -County Library, 995 Palm Street, Downtown San Luis Obispo) will be a chance to see, review, and discuss the changes that are being proposed as part of the General Plan Update. This Future Fair will also include the Program EIR scoping meeting giving the public the opportunity to ask questions about the Program EIR process and to provide input on topics to be covered. Detailed meeting materials and supporting documentation for all of the workshops discussed above, in addition to information on future opportunities for public involvement, can be found on the project web site at www.slo2035.com. TF-LUCE Meetings: To date, the TF-LUCE has participated in 27 meetings (all open to the public) to discuss the project and to refine the current LUCE documents for review by City decision makers. A complete outline of past and future meeting topics and objectives can be found on the project web site at www.slo2035.com. Planning Commission: The City Planning Commission is an advisory body, appointed by the City Council, to make decisions on land use projects through the public hearing process. The Planning Commission also provides recommendations on long range planning projects to the City Council. The Planning Commission has a key role in the LUCE Update as the reviewing body for the draft elements formulated through the TF-LUCE and City staff. To date, the Planning Commission has met five times to discuss the LUCE Update. City Council: The San Luis Obispo City Council is the ultimate review and final adoption authority for the LUCE Update. They will consider the input gathered throughout the planning process and will review the recommendations made by the City advisory bodies including the Planning Commission and the TF- City of San Luis Obispo 15 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachmp..nt ?, City of Son Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION LUCE as well as the other advisory bodies citywide. The City Council has the final opportunity to revise the alternatives presented by staff and the project consultant team and will have the responsibility to certify the Program EIR. To date, the City Council has met nine times to review and provide comments on the project development process. 11. Program Environmental EIR The comprehensive update to the City's General Plan LUCE is proposed in order to establish and implement an updated set of goals, policies, and programs as well as associated LUCE diagrams for directing the future of the community relative to topics covered by these two elements. The City of San Luis Obispo will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the adoption and implementation of the LUCE Update and any ancillary updates to other elements. This Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Program EIR has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The CEQA Guidelines identify several types of EIRs, each applicable to different project circumstances. The proposed LUCE Update EIR will be prepared as a Program EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. Program EIRs are defined by Section 15168 as the environmental impact analysis of a series of actions that can be characterized as one large, related project. The program level analysis will consider the broad environmental effects of the proposed changes associated with the LUCE Update. The EIR will be used to evaluate subsequent projects (public and private) under the proposed Update consistent with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. A Program EIR, prepared in connection with general plan elements, necessarily deals with issues on a level of broad generalities, and due to the nature of the project (a general plan update) is not as detailed as an EIR on a specific construction project. The program -level analysis addresses the probable environmental impacts of basic policies and programs, general cumulative effects, and programmatic mitigation measures and alternatives. Potential effects associated with subsequent development accommodated by a general plan update can be predicted and analyzed in more detail, but the analysis of the general plan is limited by the absence of specific development proposals in most cases. Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that after a decision is made to prepare an EIR, the lead agency must prepare an NOP to inform all responsible and trustee agencies that an EIR will be prepared. The purpose of this NOP is to provide sufficient information about the 2035 LUCE Update and its potential environmental impacts to allow agencies and the public to make a meaningful response related to the scope and content of the EIR. An Initial Study has not been prepared for this project because the EIR will address all environmental topics. Instead, a summarized description of the 2035 LUCE Update and a description of potential environmental effects to be analyzed are provided herein. 12. Potential Environmental Impacts to be Assessed Pursuant to state and local guidelines implementing CEQA, the City of San Luis Obispo, as the Lead Agency, has determined that a Program EIR is required to evaluate the proposed 2035 LUCE Update. The Program EIR will evaluate the following impacts, considered to be the probable environmental impacts resulting from the proposed general plan update: Aesthetics The city is located in a visually outstanding location, with the volcanic Morros, Santa Lucia Mountains, open space, and agricultural areas providing a scenic backdrop that frames the city. Scenic routes also traverse the planning area, such as Highway 1 and Highway 227. Long-term development accommodated by the LUCE Update could affect the overall aesthetic character of the area and development could introduce a source of additional light and glare that could adversely affect nearby areas. These issues will be addressed in the EIR. City of San Luis Obispo 16 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP A flachment 2 City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Agricultural Resources The City of San Luis Obispo is an urban area, and large scale agricultural activities are primarily located outside of the city limits; however, because of its location within a rural and agricultural region, the city functions as an important center location for agricultural commerce, both locally and beyond. Development under the LUCE Update could affect Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance surrounding the city, including land currently under cultivation. Adoption of the LUCE Update could potentially re -designate current land uses within the City's Sphere of Influence and potentially require annexation of lands influenced by agricultural activities. These issues will be analyzed in the EIR. Air Quality The proposed LUCE would permit a build -out potential that would potentially increase the city's existing population. Projected population levels may be inconsistent with the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District's Air Quality Management Plan. The increase in population would result in an increase in vehicular traffic, which would result in the marginal degradation of the air quality of the air basin. Future development may also increase air pollution due to construction activities and energy generation for utilities serving the developments. Modeling will be conducted to estimate regional (e.g., construction and operational) increases in criteria air pollutants and precursors (e.g., respirable particulate matter [PM10], fine particulate matter [PM2.5], reactive organic gases [ROG], and oxides of nitrogen [NOX]). These issues will be analyzed in the EIR. Biological Resources While a majority of the existing city is developed with urban uses, some of the areas may include sensitive plant and animal species. Existing undeveloped lands provide open space and support habitats that are considered sensitive to the region. The LUCE Update may have the potential to affect potentially sensitive species, their habitats, and wildlife corridors. These issues related to biological resources will be addressed in the EIR. There is potential for development associated with the project to result in losses to native vegetation and oak trees. In addition, locally designated natural communities may potentially be affected by development resulting from the General Plan build -out. The EIR will discuss issues related to locally designated species and natural communities. Cultural Resources Lands throughout the city and vicinity contain a wide variety of resources that are significant to the area's local history, regional architecture, archaeology, and culture. The area is within a region historically inhabited by Native American groups, namely the Obispeno Chumash. Much of the city's downtown consists of land near the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, a highly sensitive and unique historic resource. Prehistoric Native American sites and historic resources such as the Mission and Chinatown district are known to support sensitive cultural resources. These locations are considered highly sensitive as there is a high probability that they may contain significant cultural resources. Historic resources related to early city development are also prevalent within the city. Generalized impacts to historic and prehistoric resources will be described in the EIR. Geology and Soils There are several faults within the vicinity of San Luis Obispo. These faults include the Santa Andreas, Hosgri, Los Osos, West Huasna, Oceanic and Edna Faults. Other geologic hazards in the planning area include liquefaction, slope stability (landslides primarily) and alluvial soils. The EIR will include a discussion of potential seismic and landslide hazards, as well as expansive soil related hazards. The City and planning area are not located in an area that would be subject to hazards associated with tsunami, seiche, or mudflow. It should be noted that the City of San Luis Obispo recognizes these geologic influences in the application of the Uniform Building Code to all new development within the city. General Plan policies would control the density and type of development permitted in areas with identified geologic constraints. These issues will be analyzed in the proposed EIR. City of San Luis Obispo 17 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Attachmomit City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION Public Services Increased development within the City and potential annexation areas may result in a need for additional fire and police protection services. Future residential development in vacant and undeveloped areas in addition to increasing residential density at various locations may affect the area schools. Additionally, the increase in population due to the LUCE Update may require additional park and recreational facilities. Increased population may also increase maintenance costs of public facilities, including roads and result in a need for additional municipal services including administration, planning, and public works. The EIR will address impacts related to public services. Transportation and Circulation New trips will be generated by build -out of existing vacant parcels located within the current city limits, and development of the land uses envisioned for expansion areas. This planned development, the potential population increase, and tourism -related activities may generate additional vehicular movement, impact existing transportation systems, and create a demand for additional parking. These effects will be discussed in the EIR, and the recommendations carried forward through the Circulation Element. Impacts related to the use of alternative transportation methods (public transit, bikeways and pedestrian systems) will be discussed in the EIR, and policies would be included to address this issue. Global Climate Change The analysis of climate change impacts will evaluate the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the implementation of the proposed LUCE Update. To the extent feasible, this analysis will rely on the city's Climate Action Plan (CAP) for the determination of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) mass emissions with implementation of the plan. The EIR will also reconcile GHG emissions modeling assumptions with those used in the GHG emissions inventory, to ensure consistency. The EIR will determine if there are any additional feasible mitigation measures that are not currently included in the General Plan or CAP. Where potentially significant impacts of climate change on the project are identified, the EIR will include mitigation measures to help the LUCE Update remain consistent with applicable requirements. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The storage and handling of hazardous materials occurs within the City and planning area. New development may include additional storage and handling of such materials. Development of vacant and/or agricultural areas within the Sphere of Influence and within the undeveloped expansion areas may expose people to hazards resulting from exposure to dust and pesticides associated with adjacent agricultural operations. The introduction of activities and development in areas considered to be high fire hazard zones has the potential to result in increased exposure to fire hazards. In addition, impacts related to exposure to hazards related to the operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant and San Luis Obispo Airport will be addressed. These issues will be analyzed in the EIR. Hydrology and Water Quality Drainage patterns may be altered as a result of future development in accordance with the LUCE Update. In addition, development in undeveloped areas will result in changes to absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface runoff. Drainage issues will be discussed in the EIR. Potential flooding impacts affect both developed properties in the city and undeveloped lands in the city's expansion areas. The 100-year floodplain traverses through portions of the City and planning area. Surface waters may be significantly affected by development associated with the LUCE Update. Future land uses replacing undeveloped areas may discharge pollutants into surface waters. Development is also anticipated to result in increased surface runoff that has the potential to affect surface water quantities. These issues will be analyzed in the EIR. Land Use and Planning The proposed Land Use Element establishes a planned land use pattern and long-range policies to guide growth within the City corporate boundary and proposed Sphere of Influence. These policies, to be implemented by a series of implementation measures, are intended to preserve and enhance the quality City of son Luis Obispo 18 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP ffa -lo ent i ILL c.Il�l City of San Luis Obispo NOTICE OF PREPARATION of the community. The General Plan is the governing long-range guide for future development in the City, and all implementation tools will need to be made consistent with the General Plan. The EIR will examine the General Plan's consistency with regional plans, including those related to transportation, air quality, and the protection of natural resources. These issues will be examined further in the EIR. The General Plan would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plan. Noise As a result of implementation of the updated LUCE, currently vacant and undeveloped areas may be developed. The development of these areas may produce increased noise levels. Short-term increases could arise from construction, while long-term increases are typically associated with increased traffic. Future noise sources in the planning area also include (but are not limited to) the San Luis Obispo Airport, Highway 101, and industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations. Noise levels will be modeled for existing and cumulative conditions (both with and without the implementation of the plan) for the purposes of determining increases at noise sensitive receptors and potential land use incompatibilities. Noise issues will be addressed in the EIR. Population and Housing In addition to the infill of vacant land within the city limits, the General Plan envisions potential development within the city's existing Sphere of Influence. The Land Use Element Update describes the pattern and intensity of future development, including residential, commercial, industrial, recreation, and open space land uses. Infill within the current corporate boundary and within expansion areas as allowed under the proposed LUCE Update will result in additional housing and employment opportunities. The effects of anticipated growth in the City's population and housing units will be discussed in the EIR, as it pertains to regional land use and air quality -related growth forecasts to determine consistency with regional plans. The growth -inducing impacts of the General Plan will also be discussed in the EIR. Recreation The increase in population due to build -out under the Land Use Element Update may increase the demand for park and recreational facilities. Development in undeveloped areas of potential expansion areas as well as infill development may affect existing recreational opportunities. The increase in parks demand, as well as the need for additional facilities to accommodate future growth, will be discussed in the EIR. Utilities and Service Systems Increased development within the City and annexation areas may result in a need for additional fire and police protection services and may affect local schools. Additionally, the increase in population due to the LUCE Update may require additional park and recreational facilities and may also increase maintenance costs of public facilities, including roads and result in a need for additional municipal services including administration, planning, and public works. The EIR will address public services. The proposed General Plan would accommodate development that would increase the demand on sewer systems serving the planning area. This issue will be addressed in the EIR. Local creeks are subject to flooding during severe storm events. Drainage issues will be addressed in the EIR. Solid waste is transferred and disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill. The increase in solid waste that will occur with the LUCE Update will be addressed in the EIR. The City of San Luis Obispo has adopted a multi -source water supply strategy and obtains water from five sources: Salinas Reservoir (Santa Margarita Lake), Whale Rock Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, ground water, and recycled water. Build -out of the LUCE Update could result in increased demand on current water resource availability. This issue will be examined in the EIR to ensure that adequate water supply is identified for future growth. City of San Luis Obispo 19 Land Use and Circulation Elements Update NOP Il]CL1ag SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 11, 2013 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, William Riggs, Vice -Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze Absent: Commissioner Charles Stevenson Staff: Community Development Director Derek Johnson, Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, Deputy Director of Public Works Tim Bochum, Assistant City Attorney Andrea Visveshwara, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as amended. The Staff Update was moved to just after approval of the minutes after which Commr. Draze recused himself due to ownership of property in the area of 276 Tank Farm Road. MINUTES: Minutes of November 13, 2013, were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 276 Tank Farm Road. SPA 92-08: Review of amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan as part of the Chevron Remediation and Development Project; Chevron Corporation, applicant. (Phil Dunsmore) Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore presented the staff report, recommending review and comment on the draft amendments to the Airport Area Specific Plan and continuation of the item to a later date when the Final EIR, Annexation, Subdivision Map, Revised Public Facilities Financing Chapter, and Development Agreement for the project will also be considered. In response to questions from the Commissioners, Senior Planner Dunsmore explained that Staff is working closely with the County in developing the final EIR and that there is ongoing work to determine the cost and responsibility of infrastructure improvements. He stated that if the area is annexed by the City, it would be served by City water and sewer services, and, if it remains in the County, groundwater would be used and the applicant would be responsible for onsite wastewater treatment facilities. He noted that roundabouts are more efficient for traffic circulation flow, safer for bicycles and pedestrians, and generally provide enhanced levels of service, especially with multi -lane roundabouts. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2013 Page 2 Commr. Malak stated he wanted to add language to City policy about energy consumption to include reference to active and passive solar design. He also expressed concern about bicycles and vehicles turning into driveways on Tank Farm Road. Senior Planner Dunsmore stated that there is always potential for conflict with driveways but that there will be few on Tank Farm Road and more on the collector roads in the project. Commr. Riggs asked about the transition between Class 1 and 2 bike paths. Senior Planner Dunsmore stated that this will be addressed when there is more development but that, if necessary, the City would help coordinate with adjacent property owners to avoid discontinuity in the network. In response to a question from Commr. Riggs, Deputy Director of Public Works Bochum explained that the number of lanes on Santa Fe and Tank Farm Road are determined by modeling that has clearly shown the need for four lanes on Tank Farm but is at the cusp between two and four lanes for Santa Fe. He noted that development in the project area will double and that there will be more information about the models with the EIR and the Land Use Element update. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Victor Montgomery, SLO, representing Chevron, thanked Staff, especially Senior Planner Dunsmore, for working on and moving forward this complicated project that has been ongoing since 2008. He stated that Chevron is still in dialogue about improvements, all of which are linked to financing, and some things that will be discussed tonight are subject to change based on affordability. He requested that the Commission discuss and review the project but not endorse anything at this point. Commr. Fowler noted that Chevron bought this property with full knowledge that it is a contaminated site and that the check for that would be substantial. Mr. Montgomery stated Chevron also has huge projects going on in Avila and Guadalupe, and the Tank Farm property will be remediated but that development has a separate set of financial parameters. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to questions from Commr. Multari, Senior Planner Dunsmore stated that Staff is recommending both Class 1 and Class 2 bike paths as part of Phase One. Commr. Multari stated that he supports the bike paths over four lanes for Tank Farm Road if a choice had to be made. Commr. Riggs stated that roundabouts, especially multilane roundabouts, are dangerous for special needs and reduced vision individuals but somewhat effective for pedestrians and good for vehicles. He supported returning to the original language about this because it provided more flexibility. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2013 Page 3 Commr. Fowler stated that Staff had made the case for roundabouts and he supported them. In response to Commr. Fowler's question concerning why language was struck in Attachment 2 about native grasses, Senior Planner Dunsmore explained that a more intense analysis resulted in a change in the number of plant species and birds which is covered in a less specific way in another section. He also explained that "leaked' on page 3-10 of Attachment 2 was deleted because there is no exact proof of leaking although there is a record of the tanks boiling over and that "City' was struck on page 4- 11 of Attachment 3 because the County, not the City, owns the airport. Commr. Larson asked why the "Significant and unavoidable (Class /) impacts to Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp" described on page ES-9 of Attachment 1 is not in the Class I Impacts table on page IST-2-1. Senior Planner Dunsmore stated this was originally a Class 1 impact but will be listed as Class 2. Commr. Larson asked if the City, County, and relevant resource agencies are satisfied that the wetlands expansion will not result in an excessive amount of bird strikes for air traffic. Senior Planner Dunsmore stated that originally a 2:1 replacement was required but that resource agencies are now satisfied with 1:1. He noted that the amount of wetlands required has been dramatically reduced. Commr. Larson stated that it would be useful to see a graphic that overlays the various safety zones around the airport at a subsequent hearing so the Commission can consider potential uses for the public facilities parcel that will be consistent with occupational densities in the airport plan. Deputy Director of Public Works Bochum stated that a major revision was coming for consistency. He stated that since most Commissioners were not at last Monday's workshop, Staff could present a scaled -down version of the workshop at a Commission hearing. He noted that members of the low vision community came to the workshop on Monday and that phased improvement of Tank Farm Road will mean starting with a two-lane road and single -lane roundabout. He stated that timing the improvement is important because problems result with cars going too fast when there is too much space in a multilane roundabout. Commr. Fowler asked about the bunch grass on the hill close to planned business development. Senior Planner Dunsmore explained that the bunch grass can be relocated and that the area is suited for development because it has a lower level of contamination, works well with the extension of Prado Road and is away from the airport safety zone. Commr. Malak asked about the difference in cost between building a four -lane Tank Farm Road in the first phase and building two lanes in the first phase and adding two lanes in four to ten years. Deputy Director of Public Works Bochum stated that there is always additional cost when doing things twice and that costs can increase over time with the estimate for the phasing costs on Tank Farm Road at about $5 million and Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2013 Page 4 probably more like 60%. Commr. Malak supported building all four lanes in the first phase. Commr. Larson stated that he had no strong feeling about either two or four lanes for Tank Farm Road but that, while he is a strong supporter of building bicycle facilities, he did not want to sacrifice efficient movement of vehicles. He noted that there is a need to do both and he would like to see more information about facilities financing. Commr. Fowler asked how the three-year time period for restoration was established. Senior Planner Dunsmore stated that it was part of Chevron's plan. Community Development Director Johnson stated that Staff has developed a "chunked" approach to this complex project and will come back with the draft EIR and then entitlements. He noted that there may be a need for an addendum based on how the project is shaped down the road. There were no further comments made from the Commission. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 2. Staff a. Agenda Forecast 1) Meeting tomorrow will be about the Land Use Element update 2) Monday, December 16, 2013, meeting about the Circulation Element update 3) Meeting in January will address the Chevron project 3. Commission: Commr. Riggs stated he will be absent for tomorrow's meeting ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 12, 2013 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, Charles Stevenson, Vice -Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze Absent: Commissioner William Riggs Staff: Community Development Director Derek Johnson, Deputy Community Development Director Kim Murry, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of October 23, 2013, were approved as amended PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: City-wide. GPI 15-12: Land Use and Circulation Elements update. Review of Task Force draft of proposed updates to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Project includes City-wide policy changes in addition to consideration of policy and potential future physical changes for areas including but not limited to Foothill between Chorro and Santa Rosa, upper Monterey Street, Sunset Drive-in area, Calle Joaquin auto sales area, Dalidio area, Los Osos Valley Road near Los Verdes, Pacific Beach School site, property southeast of Los Osos Valley Road near Highway 101, and Avila Ranch off of Buckley Road; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kim Murry) Community Development Deputy Director Kim Murry presented an overview of the more substantive changes recommended by the Task Force for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update (TF-LUCE) committee. She provided an overview of each chapter of the legislative draft of the Land Use Element and recommended the Planning Commission take public testimony and then provide input and recommendations for consideration by the City Council. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Stephen Hansen, SLO, expressed concern about noise from Upper Monterey and about the health of San Luis Creek if proposed language in the Land Use Element Update is adopted. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 2 Debbie Farwell, SLO, stated that the Land Use Element goals assert the City should be a well balanced community concerned about quality of life but also talks about development and tourism. She noted that any density changes in the Upper Monterey area will impact her life on Palm Street and that the downtown is her "front yard" where she takes walks. She noted that tourism in California brings in over $55 billion annually and she is concerned about what will happen to her home. Robert A. Lucas, and Hana Novak, SLO, representing the San Luis Drive Neighborhood Association, presented a petition for the public record signed by over 90 residents stating their concerns and suggesting changes to the Land Use Element update in reference to the Upper Monterey area. They explained that the neighborhood association was started as a response to a 1987 City plan for a trail along the San Luis Creek through the backyards of some residents that resulted in Ordinance 1130, protecting the creek and prohibiting the trail. They noted that the neighborhood is active in protecting the neighborhood and that the association publishes a newsletter and holds frequent neighborhood events. They expressed concerns of light, glare, and noise from adjacent commercial uses. Dave Garth, SLO, formerly with the Chamber of Chamber, stated that balance is best for business and the environment. He stated that the creek is not as much of a buffer as one might think for the San Luis Drive neighborhood and that what happens on the other side of the creek impacts the neighborhood. He explained conditional use permits have been of limited use in dealing with the problems and restaurants have flaunted them. Rachel Kovesdi, SLO, representing the Dalidio Project, stated that the hotel management companies that she is in contact with about the Dalidio property have asked that the maximum number of hotel rooms be increased to 200 from the 150 listed in the draft. Stephen Peck, SLO, Mangano Homes, asked the Commission to revisit the issue of open space for the Avila Ranch area. He supported offsite mitigation for some of the required open space. Charlene Rosales, SLO Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber supports increasing the height limits for buildings, increasing the availability and type of housing in the City, and the LUCE Task Force recommendations regarding the Airport Land Use Plan, including the findings of the City's aviation consultant. She indicated that the Chamber will have suggestions for tourism and economic development policies. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Multari noted that the Commissioners need to refer to the Land Use Map to examine the areas that have not been developed and those that are designated Rural Suburban and Residential Rural. He expressed that these might become areas of urban sprawl. Community Development Deputy Director Murry displayed the map and Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 3 indicated the areas around the Urban Reserve Line that already have been subdivided. Commr. Draze asked if the City will have input if the County rezones any of these areas. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated the City is provided a referral from the County for any discretionary project that occurs within the Planning Area. She indicated that the General Plan should provide the policy basis on which to respond to any County proposals. Commr. Multari suggested adding a policy stating that the City does not support further subdivision in the City's sphere of influence area to lots smaller than 20 acres. Commr. Larson stated that he shares the same concerns and recognizes that this is a very difficult issue. He noted that the intent of Table 2 is to recapitulate the higher County zoning designations and define the City's desire to have lower densities in areas that might affect the City's plans for a green belt. He stated that while the City needs to be able to evaluate anything that affects a green belt around the City, it would be better to recognize the City's goal and develop policies without being so detailed. He supported the inclusion of a general and consistent policy statement and a clear graphic representation about the City's sphere of influence, the City limits, the green belt concept, and LAFCO's policies and role. Commr. Stevenson stated that he agrees with Commr. Larson and thinks that Table 2 is not necessary. He noted that the County's policies about agricultural preservation are particularly strong, that the County honors the City's boundaries, and that any development that would come close to City boundaries would result in consultation with the City. He supported language stating the City's desire to preserve rural character of the area and the green belt. Commr. Multari stated that the Task Force struggled with this issue and the map was an attempt to acknowledge development and define the rest of the land as open space. Commr. Draze stated that there is a need to have some influence over lands that are close to, but not within, the City limits. He supported a statement stating that it is the City's desire to have development in these areas with no more than one dwelling per 20 acres. Commr. Stevenson stated language should refer to LAFCO's sphere of influence update, done every five years, which has provisions about how any proposals for land use changes would be handled between the City and County and is specific about general plan amendments. He suggested looking at language in Memorandums of Agreement the County has with other cities. Staff member Murry indicated the City has a Memorandum of Agreement with the County that provides for referrals and discusses how land use changes will be handled. The Commission proceeded through the legislative draft of the Land Use Element by chapter. Growth Management: Commr. Fowler noted that 1.8.4 Design Standards eliminated the setback of 150 feet from public roads. He requested clarification of why this was done. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 4 Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods P. 1-50 to 1-67 Commr. Draze asked Community Development Deputy Director Murry how the concerns of the San Luis Drive neighborhood about the Upper Monterey Area will be handled. He noted it is difficult to draw up something that would work for all neighborhoods. She replied that Upper Monterey area is specifically addressed in the Special Focus Area section and the element also contains policy language that deals with the interface of nonresidential and residential uses. Commr. Larson asked if the first paragraph of 2.3.1 Density Categories and the Residential Population Assumptions table on page 1-59 of the Land Use Task Force Review Version dated 10/16-2013 are related to airport land use possibilities. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that they are about linking population density assumptions to land use designations. Commercial and Industrial Development Policies. pp. 1-68 to 1-83 Commr. Multari suggested adding "southwest of Johnson" to the second New Program on page 1-83. This was accepted. Commr. Draze asked why the Task Force retained 3.5.4.3 Air & Water Quality when the note below it states that it is not required. Commr. Multari stated that this is "comfort language" designed to reassure the public. He noted that the Task Force knows it is not necessary. Community Development Director Johnson stated that there are about a dozen of these "comfort" statements in the Land Use Element Update. Commr. Fowler asked why there is no mention of hours in 5.7.6 Noise Control. Community Development Deputy Director Murry replied that the statement about hours is in the zoning code. He also asked about "more cohesion" in 3.5.7.7 Madonna Road Centers. She replied that this is about making connections between the centers rather than intensifying the uses in these areas. Commr. Multari explained that the Task Force included the third New Program on page 1-83 because emerging technologies and trends are bringing new types of commercial businesses that aren't currently addressed in the zoning regulations. Commr. Malak asked about how the City deals with issues of noise such as nearby residents hearing conversation from an outdoor restaurant patio. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the City has a Noise Element and zoning ordinances that deal with this. Downtown: pp. 1-84 to 1-95 Commr. Stevenson asked if there was a program or anything else that deals with the statement in the last bullet of 4.0.1 Existing and New Dwellings on page 1-85. He stated this bullet point was probably not worth keeping. Commr. Draze stated that this falls in the "comfort" category. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that this is a policy direction that allows commercial core properties to serve as receiver Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 5 sites if that possibility arises. Commr. Draze supported keeping it. Commr. Stevenson: stated it is worthwhile but basically useless and asked what kind of density would be supported if density was transferred. He noted that it has to have something that would incentivize it. He suggested linking it to a program for some connection to what is allowed. Commr. Larson stated that there is another reference transferring development credits in another area of the element and that an internal cross reference might be helpful. Commr. Draze stated, in reference to 4.0.7 Traffic in Residential Areas on page 1-89, that he is not certain he wants any streets made more difficult to get through. He noted that the Downtown is a grid and grids disperse traffic more evenly. He asked if this was discussed by the Task Force. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the idea was to discourage cut -through traffic in residential areas. Commr. Draze stated that the emergency call boxes in the New Program on page 1-95 are not used where installed in the County because people use cell phones for emergencies. Community Development Director Johnson stated that staff will consider whether this is outdated technology. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that "will develop" will be replaced with "will consider" for this New Program. Airport Area p. 1-118 to 1-125 Commr. Multari stated that the Airport Compatibility Report was very informative and encouraged the Commission to review it. He explained that the Task Force was supportive of that effort but was concerned that they did not have enough information or legal counsel to understand any liability implications if the City Council were to use State law to override the Airport Land Use Commission on a 4/5ths vote. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the consultant can make a presentation to the Commission and explain the technical information and the liability issues. Commr. Larson asked about the receptivity of the Airport Land Use Commission and noted that he is familiar with setting airport safety zones and with the need to alter those zones. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Airport Land Use Commission is currently in the process of updating their Land Use Plan and the City has provided information to them. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the City has hired a consultant and conducted an in-depth study of the safety zones and noise contours, and has come to different conclusions about the safety zones and noise contours. Special Focus Areas P. 1-126 to 1-146 Commr. Stevenson stated that 8.3.3.1 Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Area is very difficult to read and understand. He suggested breaking this paragraph down into smaller sections with bullets. Commr. Draze stated that 8.3.3.2.1, which says the City will investigate adding the Upper Monterey area to the Downtown Parking District, suggests that another parking structure might be built. Commr. Multari stated that what is meant by Upper Monterey Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 6 might need more differentiation. Commr. Draze stated he was satisfied with the language of this statement. Commr. Multari stated that the Commission needed to address whether to 1) include language from the San Luis Drive Neighborhood Association petition in 8.3.3.2, 2) raise the number of allowed hotel rooms to 200 in the Dalidio Specific Plan Area, 3) accept the Task Force's decision to not allow offsite mitigation for the Dalidio area, and 4) alter the amount of open space for Avila Ranch. 8.3.2.4 SP-2, Dalidio Specific Plan Area, p. 1-133 Commr. Draze stated he supported keeping the 50% open space provision but noted that with a project of this magnitude, a General Plan amendment may be needed later. Community Development Director Johnson stated that if other performances, including the open space goal, can be achieved, flexibility on the number of hotel rooms could help with financing. Commr. Draze stated that he had no problem with 200 hotel rooms but that there are so many constraints, he doubts they would actually be able to build that many rooms. Commr. Stevenson stated he was concerned about no justification being presented and he would like to know if the request for 200 rooms has something to do with viability of a hotel project. Ms. Kovesdi, representing the Dalidio Project, stated that the hotel companies did not indicate that fewer rooms wouldn't be viable but that they have shared a 200-room business model. Commr. Larson noted that a 150- room hotel could be larger than a 200-room hotel simply by design and that he accepts the increase, especially if it means holding firm on the 50% open space goal. Commr. Draze stated that he sees no big difference between 150 and 200 and that it will be studied in the EIR for impacts to water services, traffic, etc. The Commission agreed to the increase to 200 hotel rooms. 8.3.3.2 Upper Monterey, p. 1-139 Commr. Stevenson suggested adding "neighborhood preservation" to the preamble. Commr. Multari supported this addition. Commr. Draze stated that the reference to buffering from the creek area in point 4 should be retained and that there is no need to add language prohibiting any development in the creek because that is well covered elsewhere. Commr. Multari suggested adding "and, north of California, prohibited on the creekside of the buildings" after "oriented toward Monterey Street" in point 4.- Commr. Stevenson stated he does not support the statement about meeting rooms and conference facilities in point 6 because he sees no problem with a stand-alone conference center. Commr. Draze supported accepting the existing language. Commr. Multari suggested adding "would not be envisioned on the east side of Monterey north of California." He stated this should not be excluded from the whole area but is not a good idea north of California Street. Commr. Stevenson suggested adding language about prohibiting outdoor activities on the creek side for hotels. Commr. Multari suggested "and outdoor dining and other public activities shall be prohibited on the Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 7 creekside of the buildings on Monterey." He stated that Ordinance 1130, created in 1989 in response to hotel development on one side of the creek that impacted residents on the other side, already has many of the protections requested by the San Luis Drive neighborhood, and that the question is whether it has been enforced. Community Development Director Johnson stated that staff plans to codify this as part of the annual ordinance update. Commr. Stevenson stated that it would be odd to include language like this in the General Plan because it is usually found in the zoning ordinance. Community Development Director Johnson noted that the neighborhood proposal is to expand the ordinance in terms of public review. Commr. Fowler stated there was no need to modify the language. Commr. Multari stated that, rather than being part of the policy, a program should be developed stating that the City will review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve the residents in doing so. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that this will be moved into a program. 8.3.2.6 SP-4 Avila Ranch Specific Plan Area, p.1-136 Commr. Draze stated that there is a valid argument for the request to change the open space requirements. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that Chevron would meet their open space requirements onsite and other development would meet it through payment of in -lieu fees. She noted that the Task Force draft allows up to one-third to be met with in -lieu fees and up to 30% could be eliminated if affordable housing was provided on -site. She stated it would be appropriate to clarify that the 30% could be pro -rated based on the amount of affordable units provided above inclusionary requirements. Commr. Multari suggested this addition to the language: "pro rata and above the normally required inclusionary standards." Community Development Deputy Director Murry asked if the language on pages 21-22 of the Transmittal Memo about the Madonna Inn property was acceptable. The Commissioners approved the language. Sustainability Community Development Deputy Director Murry summarized the policies and programs within the new chapter. Commissioners had no comments. Healthy Community, p. 1-150 Commr. Stevenson stated that he was pleased to see this included as it is a great start and covers important issues like walkability and access to local food. He noted that Heal SLO will help provide direction. In response to a question from Commr. Malak, Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that 10.3.1 Neighborhood Access provides guidance for community garden and farmers market locations. She noted that the Task Force changed "ensure" to "to encourage" under a new program for communal gardens in multi -family residential developments. Implementation, P. 1-151 Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 8 Commr. Larson expressed concern that reference to the CEQA process has been removed from the language in 12.3.11 Environmental Review. He stated that the title should be changed to something like "Resources and Constraints Review." He stated that there might be confusion or some might think the City is ignoring environmental review when authorizing exemptions to projects. He noted that prior language was linked with CEQA. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Task Force discussed whether to reference CEQA, but, knowing there were changes ahead, they wanted to emphasize how the City does environmental review. Commr. Multari stated that there was quite a bit of discussion on this issue and that the Task Force concluded that they wanted the City to have environmental review even if CEQA was no longer in effect and they did not want to reference particular types of documents such as initial studies or mitigated negative declarations. Commr. Larson stated that the intent that comes across is the City's commitment to early and meaningful environmental review. Commr. Multari stated that the only problem with this is the extremely remote possibility that someone could present a legal argument against the City citing the language about the features to be examined if the list is not exhaustive. Commr. Larson noted that most people would not characterize a CEQA exemption as involving community input. Commr. Multari stated that he thinks the points raised by Commr. Larson should be considered. Community Development Director Johnson suggested adding language that says some projects may be exempted per state law or city procedures. Commr. Draze stated that the purpose of the environmental review process is to give the community leaders plenty of knowledge to maintain a good quality of life for City residents. Commr. Larson stated that the clear intent is to make sure that the list of features will be examined, although not necessarily in a detailed way, when a project is considered in order to keep a high quality environment. He noted that this could easily be done for a small project. He stated that his discomfort is with using the title "Environment Review." Commr. Stevenson suggested using a lower case title: "The City's environmental review." Commr. Draze stated that he supported including the language suggested by Community Development Director Johnson. The Commission agreed to do this. 12.3.12 Communication, p. 1-154 Commr. Draze stated that the language should state that the General Plan is the basis of everything the City does. Commr. Multari suggested this change: "are consistent with the goals and policies." Commr. Stevenson asked for clarification of what prompted the inclusion of this section. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the intent is to have some basis for staff to know that the reference point is the General Plan. It was noted that communications with other agencies could be constrained by the reworded policy because not all City staff to know all of the General Plan. Commr. Multari suggested this language: "City positions communicated to other agencies shall be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan." Commr. Stevenson stated it would be valuable if all department heads and senior staff were aware of this. He supported moving this section to the preamble to the General Plan. Community Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 12, 2013 Page 9 Development Director Johnson supported using Commr. Multari's language and leaving it in Implementation. On motion by Commr. Stevenson, and seconded by Commr. Larson, to continue the review of the TF-LUCE recommended changes to the Land Use Element and the Resolution until 6 p.m., Monday, December 16, 2013. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commr. Riggs The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. There were no further comments made from the Commission. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 1. Staff a. Agenda Forecast 1) Next meeting Monday, December 16, 2013 2) January 8, 2014--scoping meeting for the Land Use and Circulation Elements update and application for 1050 Osos Street 3) January 22, 2014--Airport Area Specific plan and 2885 S. Higuera appeal of a Use Permit denial 2. Commission: Commr. Draze announced he will recuse himself for the January 22, 2014, meeting on the Airport Area Specific Plan. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary DRAFT SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 16, 2013 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners John Fowler, Ronald Malak, Michael Multari, William Riggs, Charles Stevenson, Vice -Chairperson John Larson, and Chairperson Michael Draze Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Derek Johnson, Community Development Deputy Director Kim Murry, Public Works Deputy Director Tim Bochum, Principal Transportation Planner Peggy Mandeville, and Recording Secretary Diane Clement Other: Jim Damkowitch, Principal Planner, Kittelson and Associates, Inc. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments made from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Land Use Element - Continued Hearing PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bob Lucas, SLO, expressed concern that permitting a standalone conference center will become the rationale for more development on upper Monterey Street including more and larger hotels, restaurants and shops. He stated that this is what can happen when the City's building code comes up against pressure from developers. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Multari noted that the Commission did not consider the status of the Cal Poly parcels, the Villa Montana development and the Cal Fire property at the last meeting. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the Task Force recommended the Cal Fire parcel be zoned as a special planning area and the Bella Montana condos be designated as Medium High Density Residential. On motion by Commr. Riggs, and seconded by Commr. Malak, to approve the Task Force zoning recommendations for the Cal Fire and Bella Montana properties. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 2 AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Multari reminded the Commission that a letter was received from Debbie Farwell that was not discussed at the last meeting. He stated that the changes made to the Upper Monterey planning area in response to the San Luis Drive neighborhood petition probably covered her concerns. Chair Draze stated that developing a standalone conference center in the Upper Monterey area will be difficult due to lack of undeveloped land. Commr. Larson noted that there was once a standalone conference center in the City but it was not successful. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the business model today for conference centers is that they are part of a hotel facility. Community Development Deputy Director Murry stated that the policy language supports conference facilities rather than a stand-alone conference center for both Upper Monterey and the CalTrans site. Commr. Multari supported adding a sentence to the policy and noted that the likelihood of one being built is very remote. Commr. Larson suggested adding this sentence at end of policy 6 in 8.3.3.2 on page 1-139: "No standalone conference center is envisioned." On motion by Commr. Larson, and seconded by Commr. Multari, to add "No standalone conference center is envisioned." to the end of 8.3.3.2.6. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Commr. Multari recused himself for discussion of the Luneta Drive area. Commr. Draze explained that this area is close to Commr. Multari's home. On motion by Vice -Chair Larson, and seconded by Commr. Riggs, to approve the language as proposed by the Task Force on policy L of 6.2.7 Hillside Planning Areas. AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: Commr. Multari ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 3 On motion by Commr. Riggs, and seconded by Commr. Malak, to approve a Resolution forwarding the Land Use Element Policy and Program Revisions and Additions for City Council consideration to be considered through the EIR process (GPI 15-12). AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. Vice -Chair Larson stated that while he supports the motion to approve the resolution, he finds the Introduction and Background sections of the draft Land Use Element to be weak: some of the philosophical language, the historical recapitulation, and the attempt to identify core community values based on comparisons of the 1988 and 2012 surveys does not seem to flow well and is difficult to read. He stated he is uncomfortable with this section of the draft element and suggests that between now and the end of the process, staff and the consultant team "tighten up" the language. Chair Draze noted that approving the resolution does not affect the EIR. Commr. Multari suggested a motion that states the introduction and goals do not affect the EIR. A motion was proposed by Vice -Chair Larson, and seconded by Commr. Fowler, to direct staff to simplify the language in the Introduction, the Background Review, and the statement of Community Values on return of the Land Use Element for final consideration and, furthermore, to state that the Planning Commission understands that none of that language affects the Environmental Impact Report. Commr. Malak stated that he wanted to modify the motion to identify what is meant by "simplify." Vice -Chair Larson responded that, in reading those sections of the Land Use Element, he found redundancies and contradictions, and some statements that were interpreted as reflecting core community values. He stated that the entire front section should be edited for consistency to remove contradictions and to communicate more clearly. He noted that parts pertaining to the update in 1994 were chopped and rearranged and that it appeared to be written by committee. Commr. Multari agreed with Commr. Larson's sentiment and stated that it was written by committee, but rather than directing staff to deal with the language, he proposed a friendly amendment: "The Planning Commission acknowledges that the Introduction and Background language was not reviewed in depth but that this section does not affect the environmental review, the Commission wants to forward the draft element to the Council, with the understanding that this section will be reviewed and edited in the future." This was accepted by Commr. Larson and Commr. Fowler. On motion by Vice -Chair Larson. and seconded by Commr. Fowler, that the Plannin Commission acknowledges that the Introduction and Background language was not reviewed but that this section does not affect the environmental review, therefore the Commission wants to forward the draft element to the Council, with the understanding that this section will be reviewed and edited in the future. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 4 AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. There were no further comments made from the Commission. 2. City-wide. GPI/ER 15-12: Land Use and Circulation Elements update. Review of Task Force draft of proposed updates to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Project includes introduction of Multi -Modal level of service policies in addition to updates and changes to city-wide circulation policies; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kim Murry) Principal Transportation Planner Peggy Mandeville presented the staff report, recommending the Commission review the TF-LUCE recommended changes to the Circulation Element and provide input and recommendations for consideration by the City Council. Commr. Multari thanked Eric Meyer for chairing the Task Force and moving it through a process that was not easy. He noted that the Circulation Element was delivered to the Task Force ahead of the Land Use Element and the document was in much rougher shape when the Task Force reviewed it. In addition, some of the concepts were much more technical. He noted that the Circulation Element garnered more public input than the Land Use Element. Vice -Chair Larson added his appreciation for the Task Force's work and Mr. Meyer's role as chairperson. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Dan Rivoire, San Luis Obispo County Bicycle Coalition, stated that the Coalition supports approving the multimodal goals and the proportional funding of bike infrastructure. He stated that community members are ecstatic about this and asked that his written comments be read into the record. Lea Brooks, SLO thanked the Task Force for its work and supported the 20% mode share for bikes and the movement away from a car -centric focus to one that supports all modes. Myron Amerine, SLO, also strongly supported the bike mode share and the matching of mode share with funding. He noted that in many communities, starting right after World War II, planning has made streets bicycle and pedestrian -proof and there is a need to change that. He stated that this is a chance to reverse 50 years of bad planning. Anne Wyatt, SLO, thanked Commr. Multari, Chairperson Meyer and the rest of the Task Force. She supported the multimodal goals and associated funding. She stated that the hard work of taking biking seriously as a mode of transportation is still ahead and Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 5 she emphasized that the roads need to be shared and funds are needed to improve the bike infrastructure for safety. Eric Meyer, chairperson of the LUCE Task Force, stated he reviewed many general plans and found most boring but a few are good and innovative. He noted that in this General Plan, one truly outstanding and unique feature is that the Task Force decided to allocate funding based on the desired mode share goals and that, based on this new funding idea, it becomes possible to build the infrastructure in a reasonable amount of time. He stated that discussion should continue on exactly what the numbers should be and that carpooling and public transit numbers should perhaps be broken out rather than lumped together under "other modes". Jim DeCecco, Pismo Beach, also supported the mode share goals and funding. He noted that he and his family often come to San Luis Obispo by bike to shops and restaurants. Chair Draze emphasized that the Commission welcomes testimony from anyone, not just San Luis Obispo residents, and that everyone has a right to express their opinions. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Chair Draze stated that the 2035 objectives for mode split are reasonable but that he has questions about the funding. Commr. Riggs noted that it is critical to establish the mode split goals in order to talk about specific policies. Vice -Chair Larson stated that he likes the 20% modal split goal for bicycling but he does not understand how the funding works and what the ramifications would be. Commr. Multari explained that the Task Force had questions about how to implement and labored over the language in the program regarding Transportation Funding. He stated that the General Plan should not contain the details regarding funding implementation but that the program directs staff to develop funding policies and bring them back to the Commission and the City Council. He noted that restrictions in the use of different funding sources could skew a single year's funding plan or instances where emergencies occur where funds would be needed to deal with something urgent. He noted that the Task Force tried to develop a program that could be used for budgeting and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). He also stated that, from the perspective of the Commission, the proposed CIP is reviewed by the Planning Commission every two years for a finding of consistency with the General Plan. Chair Draze stated that since some infrastructure is very expensive, such as an overpass, and that the Council and Caltrans have to make decisions on these costs, he questions the feasibility of assigning 20% of transportation funding to meet the bike goals. Commr. Multari noted that there was general Task Force support for the policies and programs but the percentage splits were debated more closely. Commr. Fowler asked Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 6 if there should be reference to Measure Y as a source of CIP funding. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville replied that the City Council took out specific reference to Measure Y in the Bicycle Transportation Plan because the measure is due to expire next year but that the current Measure Y funds are being used for bicycle funding as part of addressing traffic congestion. 1 Introduction Vice -Chair Larson reiterated his support for the 20% bicycle mode share but noted that in the listing of Transportation Goals in 1.5 Goals and Objectives, much of the language is repeated from the current Circulation Element. He stated that of the nine goals, there were four that specifically addressed non -motor vehicle items, four that addressed all forms of transportation, and only one (#4) that addressed motor vehicle traffic but is worded with a distinctly negative connotation. He supported rewording goal #4 to delete the word "only'. Commr. Multari agreed that the word does change the meaning and supported deleting it and including "If there is a demonstrated need, widening and extending streets will be done." Commr. Riggs stated that he did not read any hostility toward any mode in Section 1.5 Goals and Objectives. He stated that what he noted in the goals was an emphasis on mobility and that tonight's public speakers all talked about the deference toward vehicles that has existed for a long time. He added that he thinks the nine goals are holistic. Commr. Fowler agreed with Commr. Multari as to "only." Chair Draze stated he was more comfortable leaving it in. Vice -Chair Larson explained that he supports implementation of the goals but does not want to lose sight of the importance of moving goods and people. No action was taken to reword the goal. 2 Traffic Reduction: Commr. Fowler asked if the Task Force talked about affordable housing in close proximity to services as a means to achieve trip reduction. Community Development Director Johnson stated that this is covered in the Land Use Element under the concept of Complete Neighborhoods. Commr. Multari and Task Force Chairperson Meyer agreed that this was not explicitly discussed by the Task Force. 3 Transit Service: Commr. Riggs expressed concern transit funding fare box ratios could force a continuing reduction in service. He stated that he hoped this would not result in a setup for failure with an unsustainable goal. He also noted that there are no goals for service standards. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that riders have to pay at least 20% of the cost of the service and that there is a need to look for ways to get more people to take the bus. Commr. Riggs stated that the problem of financial pressure and the need to increase ridership needs to be acknowledged. He supported having no more than 30-minute off-peak and 20-minute peak headways. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville indicated that service provision is described in the Short Range Transit Plan. Chair Draze asked if the Short Term Transit Plan should be referenced. Commr. Multari suggested stating that the City is going to adopt service standards in Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 7 the Short Range Transit Plan rather than including service standards in the element. Commr. Stevenson suggested including transit funding limitations in the Appendix and referencing it in 3.1.1 Transit Plans because appendices can be changed without a General Plan amendment. This was accepted by the Commission. Commr. Malak stated he would like to add a program to 3.1 Programs to evaluate the feasibility of a shuttle system among shopping centers and the Downtown. Chair Draze supported this and Community Development Director Johnson stated it could be a new program under 3.1.7. Commr. Fowler asked what groups would be targeted to increase public transit ridership so that the 2035 goal could be met. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that "and other interested groups" could be added to 3.1.2 Transit Passes. 4 Bicycle Transportation Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville provided corrections to the legislative draft Commr. Multari stated that these were preliminary concepts were replaced by the proposed transportation funding policy and program. Vice -Chair Larson noted that the language used in the first sentence of 4.0.4 New Development is a good example for policy statements. Commr. Riggs stated that he likes the way 4.1.4 Campus Master Plan is more assertive and thanked the Task Force for this language. Commr. Fowler suggested adding "and educate" to 4.1.1 Incentives which was accepted by the Commission. He noted that there is no date for attaining a gold level designation in 4.1.7. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that this is reviewed approximately every five years and the City was recently renewed at the silver award level. Commr. Riggs recommended not adding a date. 5 Walking Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that 5.0.7 Sidewalks generated much discussion about sidewalk design and installation at Task Force meetings. Vice -Chair Larson reiterated his commendation of policy language like that in 5.0.3 New Development. Commr. Fowler suggested adding "and promote" to 5.0.1 Promote Walking. Commr. Riggs suggested that a combined pedestrian and bicycle plan be considered. Chair Draze stated that the downtown is quite different from the rest of the City because bikes and pedestrians do not share space. Consultant Damkowitch stated that there is a difference in design for pedestrians and bicycles. Commr. Riggs stated that he disagreed with Mr. Damkowitch. Commr. Multari suggested a new program to consider the benefits and costs of a combined city-wide bicycle and pedestrian plan. Commr. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 8 Stevenson stated that it might be better to analyze the issues relative to connectivity rather than as a citywide plan so as to focus on getting people to shopping and other destinations. Commr. Multari suggested the program in 5.1.2 does this when it references a "continuous and connected pedestrian network:" Commr. Stevenson stated that, while vague, this does have the word "connected' but that he wants to focus on and how people in residential multifamily get to work and shopping without driving a car. Vice -Chair Larson noted that 4.1.2 and 5.1.1 should, at minimum, be coordinated, or at least acknowledge each other. He stated that reference to coordination could be in 4.1.2 and that staff could develop the language. Community Development Director Johnson proposed "The City shall consider the benefits and costs of consolidating a pedestrian and bicycle plan." Commr. Riggs stated that he sees this as an opportunity to reframe these modes to be more equal in importance. 6 Multi -modal Circulation Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that considering all modes rather than just vehicle LOS is new. Vice -Chair Larson asked for an explanation of "further degradation" in 6.0.1) Defining Significant Circulation Impact. Consultant Damkowitch stated that degradation is based on a score representing degrees within each LOS and that there could be a significant impact even if the degradation does not change the LOS. Vice -Chair Larson stated that in the CEQA process, it could be argued that this kind of impact is not a substantial change. Chair Draze and Mr. Damkowitch agreed. Commr. Riggs asked about the meaning of improved crossings in 6.0.E.a Mitigation, Pedestrian. Consultant Damkowitch stated that the intent is to simply show the broader range of choices available for mitigation and that the improvements listed are for illustrative purposes. He noted that when LOS is only about vehicles, you get mitigations only about cars. Community Development Director Johnson agreed that the examples are not meant to be exhaustive. Commr. Riggs asked why language about reducing intersection crossing distance is not also in the Pedestrian paragraph. Mr. Damkowitch stated that this could clearly be added there. Consultant Damkowitch noted that the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual was the first to embrace multimodal service. He stated that some cities are including these in their plans but most are shying away from establishing standards. He noted that what SLO is doing is impressive and will put the City ahead of the curve. 7 Traffic Management Vice -Chair Larson stated that he appreciates Commr. Multari's prior comments on 7.1.9 Transportation Funding. He noted that this very important paragraph took a great effort and captures much of the direction needed. He stated that the language he praised in prior sections should serve as a model for a new policy regarding vehicular traffic. He noted that in Types of Streets, 7.2 Design Standards, the language is very passive and does not indicate who will be responsible. He stated that subdivision developments have been brought back to the Commission for relief from these things due to passive Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 9 language. He supported a policy clearly stating that new development will provide necessary circulation improvements. Vice -Chair Larson proposed a motion stating that new development shall be responsible for road improvements. Chair Draze noted that 7.2 Design Standards is about all roads, not just those in new development. Commr. Multari stated that 7.2 is about what the City will do but agreed with the idea of requiring new development to be responsible for infrastructure. Vice -Chair Larson stated that his concern is about implementing the General Plan where appropriate and, in his opinion, it is a deficiency in the Circulation Element not to carry and recognize that typical, standard, and reasonable requirement. He clarified that he is not suggesting that he would like to build roads everywhere in the City. Commr. Stevenson stated that a statement could be added to the beginning of the Circulation Element. Community Development Director Johnson stated that Chapter 9 would be the appropriate place and most of the Commission agreed. Vice -Chair Larson withdrew his motion. Air Transportation: The Commission agreed to Vice -Chair Larson's suggestion to move "as well as protecting and improving circulation and public transit access to the airport" from the deleted 11.0.1 County Airport to the end of 11.0.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Vice -Chair Larson supported renaming 11.0.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan to avoid confusion with the Airport Commission's plan. Community Development Deputy Director Murry suggested "Airport Land Use Compatibility Strategies" but subsequently, the Commission agreed to strike 11.0.2 entirely in addition to previous policy 11.0.1, 11.0.3, 11.0.4, and 11.1.4 because they are covered under the Land Use Element. Commr. Fowler stated that the word "additional' in 11.1.3 is not needed. The Commission agreed. Commr. Malak asked for a history of why there is no public transit to the airport. Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that it did exist but did not have many riders because most people wanted transportation at times that transit does not run. She stated that extending service to businesses near the airport, including stops at the airport, is now being considered. She added that there is Ride On service for a small cost. 14 Neighborhood Parking Management Chair Draze stated that 13.1.4 Parking Structures should refer to "public parking structures." Neighborhood Parking Management, p. 60 Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville stated that New Policy #2 under 14.0.1 Residential Parking Spaces could be renamed "Residential Parking Program" so that it is clear it is not referring to a benefits district. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 10 Commr. Riggs supported thinking of this district as a finance district to fund neighborhood improvements. Commr. Multari suggested adding a sentence saying "This is not a finance district." because, if the City is considering finance districts, it should be done in a transparent manner. Commr. Riggs stated that he wants to make that proposal. Commr. Multari suggested the Commission add a program to study the feasibility of establishing financing districts. He noted that at some future time, City residents may support this approach in order to make improvements to their neighborhoods. Community Development Director Johnson stated that the program Commr. Multari suggested could be a new program in 14.1. He noted that property owners would have the ultimate vote on this. Commr. Fowler and Commr. Malak supported looking into the feasibility of finance districts. Commr. Multari stated that some neighborhoods might be interested if it finances lighting, landscaping and traffic calming. Commr. Riggs stated that typically the user funds this via meters but that there are multiple ways to do it. Commr. Multari stated that the City is not going to meter residential streets. Public Works Deputy Director Bochum stated that a couple of cities have allowed meters in residential areas and that, in exchange for allowing public parking on their streets, the neighborhood gets a large share of the revenue for improvements. He stated it was investigated here once but got a resounding "no" from the public. He noted that it may make some sense near Cal Poly but probably would not be supported at a city-wide scale. The Commission opted to add a program, "The City will investigate the feasibility and desirability of establishing parking financing districts." 15 Scenic Roadways Principal Transportation Planner Mandeville recommended keeping existing language in 15.1.4 Billboards due to current litigation. On motion by Commr. Fowler, seconded by Commr. Malak, to adopt the Resolution forwarding the Circulation Element Policy and Program revisions and additions for City Council consideration to be considered through the EIR process (GPI 15-12). AYES: Commrs. Draze, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, Riggs, and Stevenson NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: None The motion passed on a 7:0 vote. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Agenda Forecast: January 8, 2014, scoping meeting for EIR for LUCE and a request for alcohol sales at 1060 Osos Street. b. Agenda Forecast: January 22, 2014 Airport Area Specific Plan and an appeal of use permit conditions at 2885 S. Higuera Street. Draft Planning Commission Minutes December 16, 2013 Page 11 4. Commission: Commr. Malak thanks Commr. Multari, Task Force Chairperson Eric Meyer and staff for work on the LUCE update. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Diane Clement Recording Secretary