Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/18/1995, 3 - CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT (LUE) MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION FROM OFFICE TO GENERAL RETAIL, AND AN AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING MAP FROM O-PD (OFFICE WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY) TO C-R (RETAIL-COMMERCIAL), CTEY Of San . AS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT GP/R.7-95 - Page 2 also raised with area-wide circulation issues and the impacts of the proposed highway interchange adjacent to the site on future development. On a 5-1 vote, the Commission recommended that the City Council direct staff to continue to process the project application because the proposal to change the land use of the site to retail with restrictions on sizes and types of uses has merit. The Commission suggested that the following issues be included in the detailed environmental and project analyses required when the project returns: ■ flood zone requirements; ■ area-wide circulation issues including the development of the adjacent highway interchange; ■ LUE consistency issues including the impacts on the tri-polar policy for government offices (include information on the inventory of vacant land available for office development); ■ restrictions related to the PG&E easement across the site; and ■ consideration of the feasibility of a specific plan for the site and surrounding area (between San Luis Obispo Creek on the east, Highway 101 on the west, Prado Road on the south and including the Sunset Drive-in, Elks Lodge and cemetery to the north). ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the proposed amendments, based on inconsistency with the general plan as identified in the attached resolution. The Council could not take an action to approve the request prior to completion of an environmental document(Section 15004. (a) of CEQA Guidelines). However, the Council • could deny the amendments with appropriate findings. Attached: Resolution denying the amendments Planning Commission Follow-up Letter Draft 3-22-95 Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Staff Report RESOLUTION NO. (1995 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL. DENYING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP FROM OFFICE TO GENERAL RETAIL AND TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM OFFICE WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (O-PD) TO RETAIL-COMMERCIAL (C-R) AT 40 PRADO ROAD(GP/R 7-95) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings on these amendments in accordance with the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered public testimony, the applicants' request GP/R 7-95, the Planning Commission's action, and staff recommendations and reports. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council resolves as follows: SECTION 1. Findings 1. The project site is not included in one of the identified geographical areas for retail expansion included in the LUE. 2. The proposed amendments will compromise the City's tri-polar policy for government offices by removing one of the designated sites for expansion of the Social Services Area pole. 3. Development of the site with retail uses is premature until development of the interchange at Highway 101 and Prado Road that will provide a more direct linkage between the site and those areas designated for retail uses. 4. This site should be considered along with others in the vicinity for a comprehensive specific plan to best address flooding and circulation issues in the area SECTION 2. The requests for an amendment to the Land Use Element map, to change the designation from Office to General Retail, and an amendment to the zoning map, to change the designation from Office with the Planned Development Overlay(0-PD)to Retail-Commercial (C-R), for property located at 40 Prado Road, are hereby denied. 3-3 City Council Resolution N8. (1995 Series) .4 Page 2 On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1995. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: ?Ci , 3� ��� �����������►���I�IIII���►���ai cityo san vuis oaSPO 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo,CA 93403-8100 March 27, 1995 Cahan Properties 11440 W. Bernardo Ct., Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92127 SUBJECT: GP/R 7-95: 40 Prado Road Consideration of an amendment to the Land Use Element map to change the designation from Office to General Retail, and an amendment of the zoning map from O-PD (Office with Planned Development overlay) to C-R (Retail- Commercial), for property located at the northeastern corner of Prado Road and Highway 101. Dear Cahan Properties: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of March 22, 1995, recommended that the City Council direct staff to continue to process the project application because the proposal to change the land use of the site to retail with restrictions on sizes and types of uses has merit. The Commission suggested that the following issues be included in the detailed environmental and project analyses required when the project returns: ■ flood zone requirements; ■ area-wide circulation issues including the development of the adjacent highway interchange; ■ LUE consistency issues including the impacts on the tri-polar policy for government offices (include information on the inventory of vacant land available for office development); ■ restrictions related to the PG&E easement across the site; and ■ consideration of the feasibility of a specific plan for the site and surrounding area (between San Luis Obispo Creek on the east, Highway 101 on the west, Prado Road on the south and including the Sunset Drive-in, Elks Lodge and cemetery to the north). The action of the Planning Commission is a recommendation to the City Council and, therefore, is not final. This matter has been tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council on Tuesday, April 18, 1995. This date, however, should be verified with the City Clerk's office. ' �� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. GP/R 7-95 Page 2 The decision of the Commission is final unless appealed to the City Clerk within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission. If you have any questions, please contact Pamela Ricci at 781-716S. ' Sincerely, Ronal G. Whis and Development R view Manager RS:mk cc: Diamond D. Corporation R.R.M. Design Group L:GPR7-95 3-� DRAFT Minutes City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission Meeting Mamb 22, 1995 PRESENT: Commrs. Janet Kourakis, Mary Whittlesey, Gilbert Hoffman, Brett Cross, Charles Senn and Chairman Barry Karleskint VACANT SEAT: One vacant seat to be filled. STAFF PRESENT: Pam Ricci, Assoc. Planner; Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manager; Cindy Clemens, Asst. City Attorney; Allison Orbison, International Planner Exchange Participant and Laura Murphy, Recording Secretary INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUEST: Pam Ricci introduced Allison Orbison, from England, to the Commission. She explained that Ms. Orbison is a planner in Redditch, England, participating in an international planning exchange program sponsored by the American Planning Association. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: The Commission agreed by consensus to change the order of the agenda items, to be addressed in the following order: Item 1, Item 3, Item 4, Item 2. PUBLIC COMMENT: None - MINUTES: The minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of February 22, 1995 were approved as amended. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Item 1. GP/R 7-95: 40 Prado Road: Review of a General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Element map designation for the property from the Office to the General Retail and rezoning from O-PD (Office with Planned Development Overlay) to C-R (Retail-Commercial); Cahan Properties, applicant. Pam Ricci presented the staff report. She said that an application had been filed to rezone the property on the north side of Prado Road just east of Highway 101, from Office-Planned Development to Retail-Commercial. She noted that the proposal also involved a General Plan Land Use Map amendment to change the site designation to General Retail. She explained that approval of the requests would allow development of the site with retail development rather than the previously approved office complex. She explained that the item has been scheduled before the Planning Commission for discussion and conceptual review to get feedback on major policy Nfil tes Planning Commission Match 22, 1995 Page 2 questions related to the request before asking the applicant to submit more detailed studies related to various environmental issues. She indicated that the staffs recommendation was for the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council that the proposed General Plan amendment and rezoning be denied based on the findings in the staff report. , Chairman Karleskint opened the public hearing. Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group, project representative, said that the applicant Bob Cahan and the leasing agent Jay Sinton were also in attendance. He stated that his client believed that the highest and best use of the site would be retail sales. He described that the project concept was to use the site for three medium-size box tenants, ranging in size from 10,000-30,000 square feet, plus a restaurant. He said the total project square footage would be 75,000-85,000 square feet with approximately 300 parking spaces. He noted that the proposed office complex which was previously approved for the site contained a total of 125,000 square feet. He explained that the tenants of the proposed project were regional draws and needed freeway access, and hopefully freeway visibility. He said that in general the tenants would not fit downtown and they had clearly identified the City of San Luis Obispo as their preferred location in the county. He acknowledged that the request was for C-R zoning, but that he was interested in any zoning that would allow them to implement the project. Mr. Montgomery also said that a 1992 flood analysis of the site determined that the required finished floor elevations for buildings was 136.5 feet. He noted that the grades on the site vary from 132' to 136', which would mean that there would need to be 2'-3' of fill in order to raise the finished floor elevation of the buildings. He said that the parking lot could remain in the flood plain. He added that the site had not flooded in the first 3 months of 1995. He addressed the issue of the tri-polar concept, by noting that the project property was partially located in the.marked area denoting social services. He showed an overhead denoting all the vacant land in the immediate vicinity which was zoned the same as the land where the County Government Center was located. He also showed a map of the Margarita Specific Plan Area, indicating that the portion below Prado Rd. would be designated, C-S or some version of C-S zoning which would allow County Government offices or a Social Services Facility. He said that changing the land use of the project site would not be crucial for the success of the tri-polar concept since there was other suitable vacant land available in the area for government offices. He said that the availability of potential social service facilities could provide a spark for the implementation of the Margarita area plan. He stated that he had discussed transportation planning for the area with City staff. He noted that a planned temporary cul-de-sac would enable the continuation of the street in the future through the drive-in theater property and to the north. Minutes Planning Commission March 22, 1995 Page 3 Mr. Montgomery also showed all the retail areas in the general area of the proposed project site. He said he thought the project could be interpreted to be consistent with the general retail policies of the General Plan, but if it could not, then it was likely that it could be consistent with the service commercial policies. He noted that relevant Land Use Element service commercial policies called for uses that satisfy "some demands of the region" and "large floor areas for display and storage, such as warehouse stores." He said he thinks that San Luis Obispo can accommodate a limited number of medium-size tenants such as Circuit City and Toys R Us. Commr. Cross expressed concerns with how project plans were going to work with the rest of the sites in the area in the future. He felt that other retail sites and their availability for development should be considered before focusing on this site. Mr. Montgomery responded that land use issues would have to be decided by the City and that proper circulation planning was the best solution for current planning of the area since other surrounding property owners would not voluntarily participate in a specific plan. Ron Whisenand answered a question posed by Commr. Hoffman concerning the progress on the Prado Rd. interchange. He said that the City was proceeding with a PSR (Project Study Report) and that the interchange would require Cal Trans approval. He noted that there was a spacing problem with the Madonna Rd. and Los Osos Valley Rd. overpasses which would require an exception from Cal Trans. He said he had heard ten million dollars as an estimated construction cost for the project. He explained that the project was several years away from development and that the City would be looking at ways to have developers help pay for the improvements. Commr. Cross asked when it would be known which design would be chosen for the interchange project. Ron Whisenand suggested checking with Wayne Peterson for that information. He said that the Commission, in their direction might want to ask for more information about the design of the interchange and how that may affect the property. Commr. Whittlesey asked about alternatives to the compressed diamond design for the interchange and their potential impacts to site development. She said it seemed reasonable to know more about what was going to happen with the interchange before approval of types and sizes of uses on the project site. Victor Montgomery stated that he would like the Planning Commission's feedback on whether the project site was a reasonable place for retail development and if the project should continue through the process. He clarified that the project objective was not to compete with downtown. He said they were amenable to several commercial zoning categories, as well as floor area limitations, and a fairly tailored list of allowable uses. Nfinutes _. Planning Commission March 22, 1995 Page 4 Commr:Whittlesey asked for clarification regarding why the project site, rather than the Dalidio project or Froom Ranch, should be developed for retail uses. Victor Montgomery responded that his site was in the City limits and was not reliant on the development of a ten million dollar interchange. He said that he has a site that can only accommodate a limited number of users, but it could be accommodated in the immediate future. Ron Whisenand added that the application site was specifically discussed as one for retail commercial development when the LUE went forward to the Planning Commission and the City Council, but the land use designation was not changed. Commr. Senn asked if the tenants would be willing to go forward with the project without the Prado Rd. interchange completed. Victor Montgomery confirmed that the tenants he had spoken to were willing to go forward with the project. Commr. Senn indicated that he was concerned about circulation issues. He noted that the property had freeway access for vehicles approaching the site from the south, but vehicles coming from the north would need to use either the Madonna Rd. or the Los Osos Valley Rd. interchanges to get to the site. He asked Victor Montgomery for his view on the situation from a circulation impact standpoint. Victor Montgomery told him that the City Engineering Department would ask for a traffic study since, there would be differences in peak hour trip generation, with a retail project. He said that retail development would work with the infrastructure present and the City would request a contribution for the development of the future interchange. Commr. Senn asked if the applicant was suggesting that the property at the comer of Prado and Higuera and the other vacant parcels should be rezoned from C-S fo Office. He pointed out that, government office uses were not permitted in the C-S zone. Vic Montgomery cited examples of government office uses in C-S zones within the City limits. He pointed out that the county or state could bury the vacant sites and put in offices, although a private landowner could not build an office project on such sites and lease them as government office space. Commr. Karleskint said that someday the interchange would be built and the tenants would lose the freeway access for a period of time and questioned if that would be a problem. Victor Montgomery said that the tenants he had spoken.to were willing to take the risk of losing the freeway access for a time. He said the key thing about the site was that the project could be built now. J40 knufes Planning Commission Mamb 22, 1995 Page 5 Chairman Karleskint closed the public hearing. Commr. Senn suggested isolating the issues to be addressed one at a time 1) Was this an appropriate use for the site? 2) Were we comfortable giving up the office zoning which exists on the site? 3) Was this consistent with the vision of which direction the City wanted to go? He also said that C-R was the broadest zoning in the City. He suggested that the Commission look at uses to determine if the site was appropriate for large commercial uses. Commr. Cross suggested instead of looking at the site as retail, the Commission needed to look at the site as commercial in the context of the whole land use map, with major retail at Froom Ranch, Dalidio, and a number of smaller sites. Commr. Karleskint said that staffs concern was that the Land Use Element has just recently been passed with a lot of sites already identified for this type of use. One of the questions the Commission needed to look at was if it would be appropriate to expand the retail area and change the scope of the Land Use Element. Commr. Whittlesey asked staff if they could come up with some information regarding the available acreage currently zoned C-S and O in the City. She said she was not comfortable with changing an LUE that was just adopted and that some consistency was necessary for the tri-polar concept to take shape. However, she felt that the project site was somewhat unique and that retail development here merited further investigation. Commr. Hoffman said he was not concerned about changing the LUE. The site may be more suited for retail, and shifting the government office pole a bit would not change the concept. He said he thought the Commission should recommend that the project be given further consideration while looking at the types and the sizes of uses. Commr. Cross said that the LUE showed clearly that the rezoning did not conform with the General Plan, but he said he never felt the site was particularly good for offices. He stressed that the Commission needed to look at the site in the context of the Land Use map. Commr. Kourakis said she understood the argument for retail, but the General Plan was recently adopted and she was not clear as to the impact that the rezoning would have on annexations being considered. She said she was also concerned about the circulation issues. She commented that any piece of land with access to a freeway was by definition appropriate for retail. She said she had never been comfortable with the tri-polar concept, although it would seem that the City and County were committed to it. She also said that it seemed that the configuration of the site would make it an appropriate site for retail uses. She said that the process of coming to the Commission before a lot of design work was done was very good and she thought the City should encourage this type of review. . Commr. Senn said that the fact that'the LUE was recently passed did not influence his view of the request. He felt that if the site remained zoned for offices, it would be many years before Minutes Planning Commission March 22, 1995 Page 6 the site would be developed. He stated that he did not anticipate a proliferation of government offices in the future. However, he said that if the parcel was rezoned for retail, then there needed to be replacement sites designated for government office expansion. He also said that some consideration should be given to what the community needed. He suggested that the applicant disclose his potential tenants to diffuse the political debate on the request He also said that he was very concerned about the circulation, identifying it as the single biggest problem that needed to be solved to the satisfaction of the decision makers. He said he would also like to have significantly more information addressing these issues. Commr. Karleskint said that the Land Use Element change was not an issue for him. He agreed that early review was good, but it meant that the Commission was reviewing something without having all the details and information about the exact project. He noted concerns with flood plain protection and circulation, compounded by the interchange and which design would be chosen. He said that the Social Services building on Prado Rd. had perhaps clianged the axis of the tri-polar concept and it seemed more suitable to expand the pole around that building or down Prado Rd. He said that he thought the site was awkward for offices, but that it could be a good site for retail if circulation and flooding problems could be addressed. Ron Whisenand said that the goal of tonight's meeting was to give some direction to staff on the policy issues that could be forwarded on to the Council, recognizing that the issues would require more study. Commr. Cross stated that it was very difficult to make long-range planning decisions if major changes were continuously being made to the General Plan. Commr. Senn made a motion that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that it consider rezoning the property to an appropriate retail designation with appropriate restrictions, subject to the Council considering all of those issues raised by the Commission's discussion. He wanted the Commission to have the opportunity to review the minutes of this meeting to make sure that they accurately reflected the Commission's intentions before the Commission's recommendation was forwarded on to the Council The motion died due to lack of a second. Commr. Cross said he would not support a motion unless it included some discussion about a Specific Plan for that area. Commr. Kourakis said that she could not support the motion because it was such a strong and positive motion in favor of retail, which may be premature, primarily due to the circulation issues. Ron Whisenand said he heard a variety of options of the request. He summarized that, traffic and circulation, flooding, EMF exposure with the P.G. & E lines going over the property, and 3,IJ Nfinutes Planning Commission March 229 1995 Page 7 the needed of a specific plan for the property/area were all identified project issues. He said staff needed direction on whether the requests had merit,provided the other issues could be adequately addressed or whether the requests were clearly inconsistent with the General Plan. Commr.Kourakis made a motion that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the proposed zoning amendment because: it was premature and inconsistent with the recently adopted General Plan; it would create traffic needs; it would impact existing circulation facilities in the area, which would in turn impact the overall circulation system in terms of improvement priorities; it will impact the tri-polar concept (the lack of sites in terms of appropriate size and configuration); and concerns existed with the P.G. & E. easement. Commr. Whittlesey seconded the motion. VOTING: AYES: Commr. Kourakis NOES: Commr. Whittlesey, Hoffman, Karleskint, Cross, Senn VACANT SEAT: One The motion failed. Commr. Whittlesey made a motion to forward this to Council because the proposal to change the land use to allow retail uses at the site deserved some consideration with restrictions as to sizes and types of uses. Ask staff to continue the process and the analysis of the various issues the Commission had discussed, including flooding, circulation, tri-polar, Land Use Element consistency, utility easements, to consider a specific plan for the area, and provide a remaining office land inventory. Commr. Senn seconded the motion. Commr. Cross said he would not support the motion unless the specific plan was required for the project. VOTING: AYES: Commr. Whittlesey, Senn, Kourakis, Hoffman, Karleskint NOES: Commr. Cross VACANT SEAT: One The motion passed. 40 /1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT men r r BY: Pam Ricci,?Associate Planner MEETING DATE: March 22, 1995 FILE NUMBER: GP/R 7-95 PROJECT ADDRESS: 40 Prado Road SUBJECT: Consideration of an amendment to the Land Use Element map to change the designation from Office to General Retail, and an amendment of the zoning map from O-PD (Office with the Planned Development overlay) to C-R(Retail-Commercial), for property located at the northeastern corner of Prado Road and Highway 101. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Recommend that the City Council deny the amendments, based on firrdings including inconsistency with adopted LUE policies. BACKGROUND Situation/Previous Review The project site is shown on the city's existing Land Use Element (LUE) map as Office. On September 1, 1992, the City Council approved general plan map and text amendments and a planned development rezoning to enable the development of a phased regional office complex on the site. Prior to approval of these requests, the property was designated on the LUE map as Interim Conservation Open Space and zoned C/OS-10. The applicant has requested a general plan amendment and rezoning to allow the site to be developed with a retail commercial development, rather than the previously approved office complex. Data Summary Applicant: Cahan Properties Representative: Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group Existing Zoning: Office-Planned Development (O-PD) Existing General Plan Land Use Designation: Office Proposed Zoning: Retail Commercial (C-R) Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation: General Retail Environmental Status: Not yet completed. Project Action Deadline: Legislative actions not subject to processing deadlines. Site Description The nearly level site is occupied by a service station at the southwest corner. High-voltage transmission lines on towers cross the northern part of the site. The remaining area is vacant, GP/R 7-95 Page 2 and has been used for non-irrigated field crops. Surrounding uses include the City corporation yard, drive-in theater and service-commercial uses. San Luis Obispo Creek Channel lies, at its closest, about 150 feet to the east. Hmject Description The applicant has submitted the attached developer's statement. In that statement, a rationale is provided for the proposal's consistency with City policies. A development plan or more precise project description has not been submitted. DISCUSSION Planning staff scheduled this request for consideration before the Planning Commission prior to completion of an initial environmental study. Staffs strategy was to schedule a conceptual review of the project to get feedback from the Planning Commission on the appropriateness of the proposed land use, before requesting more information from the applicant to complete the environmental document and prepare a detailed project analysis. Staff felt that this kind of preliminary review would be beneficial to the applicant, staff and Commission in terms of garnering a general Commission reaction to the proposal. Staff has identified two basic policy concerns with the applicant's requests: ■ Is this project site an appropriate place for retail development in terms of LUE policies that restrict such development to certain designated geographical areas? (see L General Retail Policies below) ■ What is the impact of the proposal on the City's tri polar policy for government offices? How does it affect the supply of sites for expansion of the South Higuera area office pole? (see IL Office Policies below) I. General Retail Policies 3.1.2 Locations for Regional Attractions The City should focus its retailing with regional draw in the locations of downtown, the area around the intersection of Madonna Road and Highway 101, and the area around Highway 101 and Los Osos Valley Road. 3.1.3 Madonna Road Area Retail Expansion No substantial additional land area should be added to the commercial centers at Madonna Road and Highway 101 until a detailed plan for the retail expansion has been approved by the City. The plan should describe the limits of commercial expansion, acceptable uses, phasing, and circulation improvements. Any permitted expansion should be aesthetically and functionally compatible with existing development in the area. Before approving an expansion plan, the City should consider an J_457 GP/R 7-95 Page 3 evaluation of how much it would transfer sales from existing retail areas in the City and whether the proposed uses could be developed in existing retail areas. Applicant's Position: The site is well-suited for retail development because of its access and exposure to Highway 101. The City has limited sites that meet these criteria. Development of the site with retail uses will provide goods and services to City residents that are now not available locally and will generate tax revenue. Staff's Analysis: Staff feels that there may be merit with retail development at this site sometime in the future, but that amending the land use and zoning now is premature. During the update of the LUE, this site was discussed along with others as a potential site for retail expansion. However, the land use designation for the site was not modified with the LUE adoption in August of 1994. The project site is not one of the locations described in Policy 3.1.2. The development of a full freeway interchange at Highway 101 and Prado Road is identified in the adopted Circulation Element as a Transportation Capital Project. A Project Study Report (PSR) for the development of the interchange, sponsored by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments and the City of San Luis Obispo, is underway. With completion of the interchange, there would be a more definitive linkage between the retail development on the west side of the highway and the project site. With past proposals for site development, staff has advocated the idea of a comprehensive specific plan for the area bounded by San Luis Obispo creek on the east, Prado Road on the south, Highway 101 on the west and including the Sunset Drive-in, Elks Lodge and cemetery to the north, before plans for development of this site were approved. Policy 3.1.3 does not apply directly to the site, but it does include language that supports the idea of a comprehensive planning effort for sites designated for retail expansion. The Drive-in Theater Area is designated in the LUE as a special design area. The reference to the area in the LUE is as follows: 8.6 Drive-in Theater Area This 25-acre area should be further developed only iftlooding can be mitigated without significant harm to San Luis Obispo Creek. Until}lood hazards are mitigated, continued agricultural use and low-intensity recreational.use are appropriate. Any use drawing substantial regional traffic also depends on providing a full interchange at Prado Road and extending Prado Road to connect with Madonna Road. J-16 GP/R 7-95 Page 4 Once flooding and access issues are resolved, and agricultural preservation requirements are met, the area would be suitable for government agencies' regional offices (see also policy 5.1.6). In conclusion, an amendment to the LUE map so recently after its adoption seems premature. Retail uses at the site may be more appropriate after development of the planned highway interchange. A more comprehensive approach to development of the site and . Drive-in area has long been recommended by City staff to best address flooding and circulation issues. II. Office Policies The City's LUE policy for the location of governmental agency offices is known as the tri-polar policy. The "tri" in the policy name was derived from the three geographical areas of the City identified as being appropriate for government office development and expansion (see Figure 5 attached) - the Civic Center (City and County offices), the Health Care Area (near the hospitals on Johnson Avenue) and the Social Services Area (South Higuera Street area). The project site was rezoned to O-PD in 1992 as an expansion of the Social Services Area pole. The adopted LUE includes the site in that pole, as well as discusses the future suitability of the Drive-in area to the north to be a part of the pole. 3.3.2 Office Locations D. Government social services and the regional offices of state and federal agencies should be near the intersections of South Higuera Street, Prado Road, and Highway 101 (Figure 5); Applicant's Position: The applicant feels that the highest and best use of the property is retail development. Office uses are not highly dependent upon freeway access and exposure to the degree that retail use is. With the land use change, the applicant is suggesting that Figure 5 also be modified to show an area to the east of South Higuera Street for expansion of the government office pole, rather than the area west of the Walter office complex which includes the project site (see attached existing and proposed Exhibit 5). The revisions to Figure 5 include land near the existing Phase I Social Services Center along Prado Road and a portion of the Margarita Area Specific Plan which is currently located outside the City limits. These area would be dependent on regional transportation access, but not necessarily freeway access. The change.may activate the initial phases of the Margarita Specific Plan which may stimulate development of the street extension of Prado Road to Broad Street. J-17 GP/R 7-95 Page 5 Staff's Analysis: The viability of modifying the general area for expansion of the Social Services Area pole will require further analysis of traffic and land use impacts. The following excerpt from the LUE further substantiates the need for sites to accommodate future expansion of government offices in the area: Public and Cultural Facilities Policy 5.1.6 Social Services There should be a social-services area on South Higuera Street near Prado Road (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the social services area: County Social Services; California Employment Development and Rehabilitation; • federal Social Security Administration. This area should have sufficient space to accommodate regional offices of state and federal agencies. ALTERNATIVES The Commission needs to determine whether the proposal has merit and should continue to be processed or if the request should be denied based on inconsistency with City LUE policies. 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed amendment based on inconsistency with the general plan. 2. Recommend that the City Council direct staff to continue, to process the project application. The Council could not take an action to approve the request prior to completion of an environmental document (Section 15004. (a) of CEQA Guidelines). However, the Council could indicate support for the land use change with direction to staff to complete the environmental document and return with a detailed project analysis. RECOAEMMVDATION Recommend that the City Council deny the amendment to the Land Use Element map to change the designation from Office to General Retail, and an amendment of the zoning map from O-PD (Office with the Planned Development overlay) to C-R (Retail-Commercial), based on the following findings: 1. The project site is not included in one of the.identified geographical areas for retail expansion included in the LUE. �Av GP/R 7-95 Page 6 2. The proposed amendments will compromise the City's tri-polar policy for government offices by removing one of the designated sites for expansion of the Social Services Area pole. 3. Development of the site with retail uses is premature until development of the interchange at Highway 101 and Prado Road that will provide a more direct linkage between the site and those areas designated for retail uses. 4. This site should be considered along with others in the vicinity for a comprehensive specific plan to best address flooding and circulation issues in the area. Attached: Vicinity Map Developer's Statement Existing and Proposed versions of Figure 5 LNZONIN(AGPR7-95.PC I C/OS 10 �; ,��`�i S .�' .\`�i,•:'r;:v;:Myl:\�,�y r^`:.:.1:'y;.^;i:'\,,..u:=�i�%c�q)�;pi;�:\�F?1m;,. I ? :'ap4�: •:�A? L 'fiGdti,-e.�,.F P• \):k:�...�..;f,L. / � c�.1.rv`•. (b,9..'R.'.,v�;::.:,r.��,�Et)FicY;p. nq\..:,ryhn t'A,)N*ih:.:\'•,. ".[;. �:t\r1�i-.\:,FW\r���\: !o .4 E . xx�,'v,�..�msix•''1,�Y :z? C` ,\v 1r Ci1�•::R',ugwY \('\\ :P.�\4' ,\a,.y::wy r:bN:.. O5� '\.. �r 5 �'. N'i "".F, : tX, r• e,r 1i H\ x u:. _ t, b. :c�N1,N`''.. .� :�,��r,��,�"�`:;�.'�;�?:%��'•�ytitr7��+;i�1�'��,�-' '��n. I KE:%2i�: .G:: �'F { .fib.. :. , .�i;.. �` yY�i':&ga:.h�;.; �ti` ,r\ 1\ - S� v"r":W`::.:n:^'+a'lffy'% ��aaaa yWYS .' `114, E.:fF 4 � I :I n.a.;F:w'dr4,. ��,2�':uvxFT Vit.' aiJ.'\\asm3ti ti `,. .• c.;�.;,.,�A. `�3' '._ O i�r�`� ,M1tyy'^:^':xcyl..a.'�:'a .�W: . 'IIC.`\Ms6.. A5:,.:aE" AaH.,IF• 'n'Gm)t':,':.:.,1!y y rY:l1.��vF0.'^^�. �i0 0 `'::�AiFw.�u'�„n+fiiF`�.a+.;.'.'E`.``'i::` x��Y�N\4Y`\`c�`�.�;Fd\ny •r,.:ieil 0 • � :”N\`\•�,.�"8Y\Fa\`:,`�r`'1�:N?;r!�..�iiw1,! (�,�1 �.` �1r ' q'r'':�`�`�'^,:I tw•r.e.r •� 4r` • Q �� o *► 4.*eY +M4i ry+/ O PF C. G PF c .,w .� C C �C•Lf10Yt �.\� '� J—J VICINITY MAP GP/R 7-95 NORTH 40 PRADO ROAD A 3� PRADO ROAD AND HIGHWAY 101 January 17, 1995 STATEMENT The proposed action is for the City to rezone property from its existing O-PD designation to the C-R designation. The applicant requests this action for the following reasons: 1. There is an existing unmet demand from tenants for retail space with accessibility and exposure to Freeway 101. 2. The City has a limited number of sites which are directly accessible from Freeway 101 and with exposure to Freeway 101. 3. The City should encourage the highest and best use of its limited resources including land with unique attributes attractive to retail tenants. 4. The site, with its attractiveness to retailers, could generate tax revenue for the City. 5. The site may provide goods and services to City residents which they now leave the area to obtain. What follows is a review of policies of the 1994 City General Plan Land Use Element which are consistent with the proposed rezoning action. community Goals The proposed action is consistent with a proactive approach to utilization of the City's assets. Environmental goals are furthered by placing retail uses adjacent to regional transportation thereby reducing miles driven. The site is already partially developed, has an existing urban land use designation and is not an environmentally sensitive habitat. The proposed rezoning is consistent with society and economy goals; 9, 10, 12, 13, 21, 22, and 24. It is consistent with the goals for urban form since this project is infill development. Nonresidential Growth Rate: The project would be exempt under Policy 1.11.4. Commercial Sift The site is consistent with policies 3.01 Slope, 3.02 Access, and is not an expansion into a residential area. General Retail: The proposed C-R zoning and uses allowable within that zone are consistent with applicable policies 3.11, 3.1.2, and 3.1.6. The proposed site is immediately adjacent to U.S. 101 between Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road. It is at a location currently being analyzed for an overpass and additional on/off ramps. The project floor area ratio is not expected to exceed 3.0. 3-sl Prado Road and Highway 101 (cont'd) Page 2 January 17, 1995 Creeks, Flooding, Wetlands: The project is not adjacent to a creek and contains no known wetlands. The project is within the 100-year flood zone. Prior analysis has indicated that finish floor elevation for buildings will need to be raised above flood levels. The proposed rezoning does not appear to decrease the feasibility of this mitigation measure for allowable uses within the C-R zone. The project will comply with Policy 6.43.E(4) and Policy 65.1A3. Existing Zoning and Tripolar Concent: The existing zoning of the site is O-PD and the site is identified as a part of the tripolar concept for social services facilities. The social services portion of the tripolar concept is based upon support and enhancement of the County Social Services Building and Walter Brothers Building complex. Figure 5 of the General Plan broadly maps this area. The action to rezone this area occurred in September 1992. However, to date, no specific tenant has been identified to move the project forward. The proposed C-R zone would delete this site from the office category and from the tripolar concept. However, this action would not defeat the tripolar concept. The proposed revision of Figure 5 attached shows an alternative and perhaps better tripolar direction. Office use is not highly dependent upon freeway access and exposure to the degree retail use is. Highest and best use of this site would be retail. Regional office use needs reasonable regional transportation access but not freeway exposure. Refocusing the tripolar concept to include additional area east of South Higuera Street has the following support attributes: 1. There is available land near the existing Phase I Social Services Center along Prado Road. 2. The Margarita Area Specific Plan includes area for a significant expansion of the types of uses present in Higuera Commerce Park, which includes County Social Services. The identification of the Prado Road frontage (south side) and a portion of the Margarita Area Specific Plan would provide for the tripolar concept expansion and may provide the spark to ignite the initial phases of the Margarita Specific Plan and the critical extension of Prado Road to Broad Street. In summary, the proposed rezoning isn't detrimental to the tripolar concept in the same vicinity as shown in the General Plan and it allows for the highest and best use of the site which is retail v/vm-prado.app .3-2J Land Use Element I 1 I I I I I 1 � I I j 1 j CMC CENTER i CULTURAL PACILMES AREA j 1 HEALTH CARE I AREA C I i • � I i % I FIGURE 5 (ftRSGD 1zevi4Miov4) city of PUBLIC FACILITIES AREAS san tins oBispo 9/9/94 50 P:2.3 Z ✓���7��r �s7�•• al ♦��I�17 �I�4.► VW iir+i• � Land Use Element 56 CIVIC CENTER CULTURAL FACILITIES AREA I HEALTH CARE AREA 1 . AREA crty FIGURE 5 0 sir o ^'San luis �f a 8 _ ? ; PUBLIC FACILITIES, AREAS • i • 9/9/94 :rYNll