Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/20/1996, 7 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS TO PERMIT NIGHTCLUBS IN THE SERVICE COMMERCIAL (C-S) ZONE (TA 87-96, ER 87-96) A] council aaGEnaa Repoin CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Arnold B.Jonasommunity Development Director Prepared By: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner Ff?, SUBJECT: Request to amend the text of the Zoning Regulations to permit nightclubs in the Service Commercial (C-S)zone(TA 87-96, ER 87-96). CAO RECOMMENDATION Introduce an ordinance to print, approving a negative declaration with mitigation measures, and amending the text ofthe zoning regulations(Section 17.22.010, Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone)to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone,with the requirement for a Planning Commission use permit and the addition of a footnote, based on findings. DISCUSSION Backgmund The applicants want to open a country western dance club in San Luis Obispo. In order to establish their club,they have applied to the City to amend the zoning regulations to permit nightclubs in the C-S zone. Under the current regulations, a bar or a specialized school that teaches dance could be established with an administrative use permit in the C-S zone, but a nightclub is not allowed. The zoning regulations define a nightclub as follows: Nightclub means "a baa, restaurant, coffee house or similar establishment where a dance floor or entertainment is provided " Staff has determined that the proposed use, which would be open at night, serve alcohol and have a large dance floor, is classified as a nightclub under City regulations. The main issue with the request is its consistency with the general plan, particularly Land Use Element Policy 4.3 which states that entertainment facilities, such as nightclubs, should be in the downtown. The staff report and initial study conclude that it is possible to find the amendment request consistent with the general plan if a determination is made that the use is of a type that is too big or out of character with the downtown. That is the reason that staff and the Planning Comisssion recommended that a footnote be added to the chart of the zoning regulations which states: Council Agenda Report- TA 87-96 Page 2 In the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. A business with a floor area of 4,500 square feet or more was viewed to be of the type of scale that may be more appropriate in an outlying area. Planning Commission's Action On a 5-0-2 vote, the Planning Commission at a meeting held on July 24, 1996, recommended that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to allow nightclubs in the C-S zones, with a requirement for a Planning Commission use permit, a footnote added to Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, of the zoning regulations requiring a minimum floor area of 4,500 square feet, and support for approval of the negative declaration with mitigations measures,with an amendment to the initial study regarding solid waste impacts. Many interested members of the public attended the public hearing. All those who spoke, provided testimony in favor of the request. The Commission's discussion focussed on the intent of the LUE policy to keep nightclubs downtown and how to best control the potential impacts of individual requests. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt the Resolution, included as Attachment 2, denying the requested amendment based on inconsistency with the City's General Plan. 2. Continue with direction to the staff and applicant if the Council desires further information or analysis to render a decision. Attachments Attachment 1: Ordinance approving the text amendment Attachment 2: Resolution denying the text amendment Attachment 3: Draft 7-24-96 Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 4: Letters from project supporters Attachment 5: 7-24-96 Planning Commission Staff Report 7-Z ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. (1996 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS (SECTION 17.22.010, TABLE 9, USES ALLOWED BY ZONE) TO ALLOW NIGHTCLUBS IN THE C-S ZONE WITH THE APPROVAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION USE PERMIT AND THE ADDITION OF A FOOTNOTE (TA 87-96) WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 24, 1996, and recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the City's Zoning Regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 20, 1996, and has considered testimony of other interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan, the purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact with mitigation measures, as prepared by staff, and reviewed and amended by the Planning Commission. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration with mitigation meeasures adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed text amendment to the zoning regulations, and reflects the independent judgement of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and incorporates the following mitigation measures into the project: 1. Approval of a change to the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone shall be contingent upon a Planning Commission use permit being required prior to establishment of the use. A footnote shall be added to Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, that states: City Council Ordinance No. (1996 Series) Page 2 77n the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. ' 2. With consideration of the required use permit, plans for establishment of nightclubs at specific sites shall be reviewed to determine if there are sensitive noise receptors nearby, and whether building soundproofing will be required, or additional screening is needed between the project site and adjoining lots. SECTION 2. Findings. 1. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity because individual requests for nightclubs would require a Planning Commission use permit and issues with traffic, noise and neighborhood compatibility would be properly evaluated. 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan,given that only those larger nightclubs with a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area would be considered. SECTION 3. Approval. Section 17.22.010, Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone is hereby amended to contain the requirement for a Planning Commission Use Permit in the C-S zone and the addition of the following footnote: In the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. 7�� City Council Ordinance No. (1996 Series) Page 3 INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the 20th day of August, 1996, on a motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Bonnie Gawf APPROVED: *ity4eyfTJger sen 7-5 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. (1996 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS (SECTION 17.22.010, TABLE 9, USES ALLOWED BY ZONE) TO ALLOW NIGHTCLUBS IN THE C-S ZONE WITH THE APPROVAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION USE PERMIT AND THE ADDITION OF A FOOTNOTE (TA 87-96) WIEIEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 24, 1996, and recommended approval of an amendment to the City's Zoning Regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on August 20, 1996, and has considered testimony of other interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact with mitigation measures, as prepared by staff, and reviewed and amended by the Planning Commission. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Finding. 1. The proposed amendment to the zoning regulations is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Policy(LUE) 4.31 Entertainment and Cultural Facilities, of the Downtown section of the LUE that calls for entertainment facilities, such as nightclubs to be located in the downtown. SECTION 2. Denial. The request for approval of the amendment to the text of the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone is hereby denied. 74 City Council Resolution No. (1996 Series) 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 , 1996. Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Bonnie Gawf APPROVED: ity tto ey ff J rgenson LV=u.s7-%.mY Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 2 1. Citywide: TA 87-96 and ER 87-96: Review of a request to amend the text of the Zoning Regulations to permit nightclubs in the C-S zone, including the review of the environmental Impact Determination; William Bogdan and Kenn Shaw, applicants. Associate Planner Ricci presented the staff report, recommending approval of the request to amend the text of the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S Zone with the requirement for an administrative use permit and the addition of the footnote to Section 17.22.010, Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, based on the findings. Commissioner Whittlesey asked staff which C-S Zones back up to residential areas. Associate Planner Ricci stated there is C-S property on the corner of S. Higuera and Margarita near residential neighborhoods. There are other C-S properties along Zacca Lane adjacent to a mobile home park. Most of these have the S Overlay. There is also the area north of the mobile home park and properties on the east side of Broad St. Planner Whisenand reminded the Commission of the recent indoor shooting range application in a C-S district adjacent to residential at Pacific and Carmel. Commissioner Veesart asked if a bar would be allowed in the C-S Zone. Associate Planner Ricci answered yes. Commissioner Veesart asked if a bar had a dance floor would it be considered a nightclub, regardless of the size. Associate Planner Ricci replied yes. Commissioner Jeffrey asked how many parking spaces would be required. Associate Planner Ricci stated it would be similar to the calculations required for restaurants. The request tonight is to amend the zoning regulations; it is not for this particular site. Commissioner Jeffrey expressed concerns relative to the adequacy of parking spaces. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 3 William Bogdan, 2994 S. I-iguera, stated they are requesting that they be allowed a nightclub in a C-S Zone. The particular nightclub they wish to open would probably be open four or five nights a week. All activities would take place in the evenings, starting around 6:30 with some dance lessons until approximately 9:00. From 9:00 to close there would be a country western dance. Mr. Bogdan feels the City is in need of something like this. This is a heavily based agriculture and ranch area It is odd because from San Jose to Ventura there are no places that have country western dancing, and yet there are about two dozen places in the Central Coast which teach country western dancing. Mr. Bogdan stated this particular site is excellent in the fact that it is somewhat remote. There are no neighbors in the area. There are business located next to this site and they all close by 7:00 p.m. Mr. Bogdan feels this would be a benefit to the community. He feels this wouldn't work in all C-S Zones because there wouldn't be appropriate parking. This particular site works out very well. Mr. Bogdan offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if this site has approximate 50 parking spaces. Mr. Bogdan stated that is correct. Commissioner Jeffrey asked Mr. Bogdan for the anticipated volume of patrons at this location. Mr. Bogdan stated calculations would require approximately 75 parking spaces. The uniqueness of this site is that directly across the street is Cypress Plaza and the owner has indicated he would be very willing to sign an agreement to allow parking in the Cypress Plaza parking lot. Also next door to this site is the DMV. Mr. Bogdan has contacted the State but cannot get a letter from them granting or denying use of the parking lot. Parking is allowed in the DMV parking lot after 5:00. The parking situation is in the City's favor. There is an abundance of parking. Commissioner Jeffrey had concerns of pedestrians crossing in the middle of the street rather than walking to the corner to the crosswalk. Mr. Bogdan stated most likely people would be parking at the DMV and therefore would not be walking across the street. Commissioner Jeffrey asked how many patrons would be allowed in this building. Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 4 Mr. Bogdan stated he would like to be allowed up to 400. He will have to confer with the Fire Marshal. Commissioner Whittlesey asked Mr. Bogdan to describe how large the dance floor will be. Mr. Bogdan stated this is the largest building that they could find that was available where there are no neighbors around. All businesses close at the latest 6:30-7:00. A conflict does not exist. Mr. Bogdan stated as soon as they find the outcome of this evening's item, they will go to an architect to find out how large of a dance floor they can build at this site. The building itself is 4,500 s.f. They would have liked a larger building. Country western dancing requires a large dance floor. Frank Shehan, 1632 Fredricks St., San Luis Obispo, feels allowing nightclubs in the C-S Zone is the first step necessary to get this project through. He feels the Commission should give favorable consideration to this issue. The opportunity to have a facility that is not infringing on residential neighborhoods which provides adult entertainment is welcome. He has been a country and western dancer for 3-4 years and has seen not problems where he dances at the Graduate. The Graduate has been providing country western entertainment on Tuesday and Thursday nights for quite a while. There should be other facilities for country western dancing in the City. Dancing is a wonderful sport. He strongly encouraged the Commission to give favorable consideration to this item. Chuck Snyder, 2038 San Luis Dr., feels that nobody can afford to go into business in the downtown area or provide the parking for a 4,000 s.f. building. He feels entertainment is going to have to go outside of the downtown area. Country western dancing is a good activity and attracts a good bunch of people. Pat Mathews, P.O. Box 13611, San Luis Obispo, stated he has known Mr. Bogdan for roughly 15 years. Mr. Mathews feels this is an opportune location for this type of facility. There aren't any neighbors near this location who would be disturbed by noise. Mara Broadski, 42 El Mirador, San Luis Obispo, stated she is a college student and there aren't many things to do that's good clean fun. She enjoys country dancing. She feels this location for this facility is very accessible. This would be a great opportunity for everyone in the county to have fun without driving downtown and having to find parking. Mike Denieve, 534 Crestmont Dr., San Luis Obispo, stated it is ironic that bars and dance studios are allowed in this zone, but not a combination of the two. He feels it is too bad for an applicant who has to pay$2,800 for the City to combine the two words together. There should be opportunity to recognize the need for flexibility in City documents and not a narrow interpretation which must be followed. This type of use will be governed by requirements and permit approvals. He feels the Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 5 narrow interpretation of ordinances has almost becomes subjective. We need to look at things on a more broad base. The opportunity for the City to provide a variety of these kinds of recreations is getting more narrow based on issues of concern such as parking, access, and over impacting an area. Mr. Denieve previously served on the Planning Commission for a term of four years. He would like to see the Commission give the ordinance the opportunity to allow businesses to apply and not at an expensive cost to be able to come to the City with a rational proposal. Dianne Fisher, 1661 Fairview Ave., Grover Beach, stated she enjoys being able to go somewhere that's comfortable and where the people are friendly. She likes the fact that San Luis is a nonsmoking community. Allowing establishments in this zone could also increase revenues. Country western dancing is great exercise. She feels that this would be a real positive for the community. Country dancers take pride in what they do and there's not an issue with drinking. Ernie Brink, 1220 Village Ct., Santa Maria, feels it would benefit San Luis City to allow C-S areas to be open to nightclubs instead of just bars. There is plenty of parking if it is shared with other businesses that operate during the day. A place like this would draw a large crowd for dancing. This could bring in revenue for the City. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS: Commissioner Veesart stated he enjoys dancing and likes the idea of this place. He likes the idea of dance lessons. His primary concern hinges upon the combination of drinking and driving. He asked staff the history of the LUE Policy 4.3 which encourages locating these kinds of facilities in the downtown area. He feels there may be some problems with having nightclubs in the C-S Zone. Associate Planner Ricci stated the downtown should be the focal point and entertainment center of the community. A concentration of bars and nightclubs and these types of uses attracts and keeps people in the entertainment center. There has been testimony given at use permit hearings regarding vandalism, loitering, public urination, and long lines in the downtown area and concerns regarding the development of a different character in the downtown. A way that staff was able to find this proposal consistent with this zone is to distinguish this type of operation from some others is by the floor area requirement, parking, and the proximity of residential areas. Commissioner Veesart stated the staff recommendation is that this use be allowed with an administrative use permit. He asked for staffs comment on a Planning Commission approval of the use permit. Associate Planner Ricci stated that is an alternative. �n Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 6 Comtnissioner Whittlesey stated No. 12f states there are no impacts relative to solid waste disposal. She expressed concern regarding this type of facility generating waste that is recyclable such as bottles, cans, and cardboard. She suggested the initial study be looked at again to make this a less than significant impact. This would encourage future proposals to dispose of recyclables properly. She also has concerns regarding the initial study on No. 1 l b regarding security plans and feels this answer would not hold true in every instance. Associate Planner Ricci stated the response to No. 11 b was made with the initial permit request and was only added to the initial study as information. Planner Whisenand stated nightclubs would be subject to individual review by the police dept. This does not apply to all projects. Commissioner Whittlesey asked how the City addresses off-site parking. Associate Planner Ricci stated there is specific criteria for off-site parking. It must be within 300 feet of the use and shall not be separated from the use which could cause hazards for pedestrians and off-site parking shall be owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the party controlling the use. Planner Whisenand stated off-site parking does go through a permit process. It is a judgment call on a case by case basis. Commissioner Jeffrey asked Commissioner Veesart his reason for requiring Planning Commission approval rather than administrative approval. Commissioner Veesart stated this is a new use and he would feel more comfortable with Planning Commission review and approval to make sure there aren't impacts to residential neighborhoods and traffic. Some things are hard to predict. Comrnissioner Jeffrey noted there is quite a disparity in the allowed uses in Table 9 of the C-S Zones. The fact that this is tied in with a use permit does make him more comfortable with staffs recommendation. Commissioner Jeffrey made a motion to approve the request to amend the text of the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S Zone and as modified by Commissioner Whittlesey relative to solid waste disposal, with the requirement for a Planning Commission use permit and the addition of the footnote to Section 17.22.010, Table 9,Uses Allowed by Zone, and a 4,500 s.f. minimum floor area, based on the findings. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ready. y-/z- Draft Planning Commission Meeting July 24, 1996 Page 7 AYES: Commissioners Jeffrey, Ready, Veesart, Whittlesey, and Chairman Karleskint NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Kourakis and Senn The motion passed. 2. 1251 Buchon Street: V 80-96: A peal of the Hearing Officer's decision to deny a Variance for lot coverage'and various setb ck exceptions; R-2 zone; Stephen and Mary Ellen Lamb, applicants and appellants. The applicant withdrew this project. o Commission action was required or taken. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff: Agenda Forecast Planner Whisenand presented the agenda forecast for the Planning Commission Meetings of August 14th, 28th and September 14th. Assistant City Attorney Clemens noted the right t take issues and evaluation on the Mission Plaza expansion properties has been resolved. 4. Commission: Commissioner Whittlesey informed the Commis 'on and staff she may not be able to attend the meeting of August 14th. Chairman Karleskint informed the Commission that the Rota will be having Steve Barrish speak on economic planning for San Luis Obispo on July 31 st. 5. Completion of Planning Commission Retreat Items: A. Meeting Efficiency The Commission and staff held a discussion on ways to mo a efficiently accomplish the goals of their meetings. ATTACHMENT4 R. Duane Morris 619 Grove St., San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93406 July 22, 1996 RECEIVED Planning Commission JUL 2 4IN6 City of San Luis Obispo CRY OFps DEVE` ISpo o 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401 re: Cowboy Kenny's Zone Text Amendment change Dear Chairperson and Commissioners, This letter is a request that you support the request by Cowboy Kenny's for the change in the Zone Text Amendment to allow western dancing at the site you are considering. I don't often wear my cowboy hat and boots but I do very much like to two-step, waltz, and line dance and would urge you to support this proposal. A group of friends and myself do like to go out often to dance and would be appreciative of having a place that would be operated by Kenny in San Luis Obispo. Were it not for a previous meeting commitment for the evening of the 24th of July I would be in attendance at your hearing to support this proposal. Sincerely, OULILC-45_�2 Duane Morris :'cm:Stephen_.Nicks h;echanieal O:tailing.Inc.Fax:8055461.b1 e:SOS 546995.0 To:I.Is.Pan Richie a::City of San Luis Obispo Page 2 o12 Wednesday.July 2=.191111:31:32::; MDI MECHANICAL DETAILING, INC. Stephen E.Hicks 1026 Chorro Street. Suite 7, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (S05)546-9959 Jul- 24. 1996 qF Planing Commission y ✓(/�C��V FO Cit'- of San Luis Obispo 2 4 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 0 Re: Rezoning CS zones to include Night Clubs Dear Commissioners. This letter is to support the efforts of Mr. Ken Shaw to open a Country-Western Dance Club in the South Higuera location ne\t to the Department of Motor Vehicles office. I would support a revision in the zoning for CS zones to alloy Night Clubs if that is what is required. I do think there needs to be some control over the specific projects that fall into this variance and some kind of committee needs to approve each application. In this particular case Ken Shay is an e\ceptionally honest and hard working individual. The type of club he is planning will not have any negative impact on the community and I support his efforts. Sincerely. Stephen E. Hicks ;1r/-j CITY OF SAN LUIS OBLSPO ATTACHMENT 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#1 BY: Pam RiccL Associate Planner MEETING DATE: July 24, 1996 FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manager FILE NUMBER: TA 87-96; ER 87-96 PROJECT ADDRESS: Applies to C-S zones citywide SUBJECT: Request to amend the text of the Zoning Regulations to permit nightclubs in the Service Commercial (C-S)zone. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the text amendment to the City Council, based on findings. BACKGROUND Situation The applicants want to open a country western dance club in San Luis Obispo. After unsuccessful attempts to find a suitable site in the downtown, they applied for an administrative use permit (A 40- 96)to allow their business at 3046 South Hlguera Street, Suite A. The administrative use permit was received as a request to allow a dance hall. However, after closer review of the request, Planning staff determined that the proposed use was most like a nightclub (a use not allowed in the C-S zone), rather than a specialized school for dancing (a conditionally allowed use). The applicants then formally withdrew their application for the administrative use permit since the use could not be established at their selected C-S site under the current regulations. The zoning regulations define a nightclub as follows: Nightclub means "a bar, restaurant; coffee house or similar establishment where a dance floor or entertainment is provided" The proposed use would serve drinks, including alcoholic beverages, be open during evening hours, and have a large dance floor. Therefore, staff has determined that the proposed use would be classified as a nightclub. The applicants have requested a text amendment to the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone. The Planning Commission reviews zoning text amendments and makes a recommendation to the City Council, which takes a final action on such requests. Data Summary Applicants/Representatives: William Bogdan& Kenn Shaw %�lo Teat Amendment TA 87-96 Page 2 Zoning Category Affected: Service-Commercial (C-S) General Plan Land Use Designation: Services&Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures was recommended by the Development Review Manager on July 17, 1996. Final action on the initial study will be taken by the City Council. Project Action Deadline: Legislative actions not subject to processing deadlines. EVALUATION The key issue with the project is whether it can be found to be consistent with the City's general plan as adopted. The attached initial study concludes that it is possible to find the request consistent with the general plan with the restriction that nightclubs in the C-S zone be limited to those with larger floor area needs(a minimum of 4,000 square feet of floor area). C-S zones are generally located in the southern part of the City along the Broad Street and South Higuera Street corridors. The following paragraphs discuss the requested amendment's consistency with City plans and policies: 1. Downtown as the City's Entertainment Center The following policy is the key one to an analysis of the proposal's consistency with the LUE. The section of the LUE that discusses Downtown, specifically Policy 4.3 says: "Cultural facilities, such as museums, galleries, and public theaters should be downtown. Entertainment facilities, such as m hiclubs acrd private theaters should be in the downtown, too. Locations outside downtown may be more appropriate for facilities that would be out of character or too big for downtown to accommodate comfortably, such as the major performing arts center planned for the Cal Poly campus " With its action last year on the appeal of an administrative use permit to establish the new drinking establishment known as The Library in the downtown, the City Council affirmed that the downtown was intended to be the entertainment center of the City. The proposal to allow nightclubs in outlying areas runs contrary to the intent of the policy which is to concentrate such facilities in the downtown. The initial study concludes that if it can be determined that there are different types of nightclubs that may have characteristics or space needs that are better suited to outlying locations, rather than downtown,then it may be possible to view the request as being consistent with the policy. Recommended Mitigation Measure No.l requires that the proposed change to the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone be contingent upon an administrative use permit being required prior to establishment of the use. A footnote is also recommended to be added to Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, that states: "In the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,000 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. " Teat Amendment TA 87-96 Page 3 The restriction on size to those nightclubs containing a minimum of 4,000 square feet of floor area was proposed to provide a criterion to judge whether a proposed nightclub might have space needs that prevents it from being located in the downtown. This size restriction directly relates to the policy language that certain facilities may be "too big for downtown to accommodate comfortably'. Planning staff came up with the 4,000 square-foot minimum after reviewing the size of other existing nightclubs and bars in the City through the Land Use Inventory (see attached Table 1). Three establishments in the downtown, Mother's Tavern, SLO Brewing Company, and Tortilla Flats, contain around 4,000 square feet. The Graduate, by far the largest nightclub in town, has a floor area of 12,000 square feet, and is located outside the downtown in the Manufacturing M zone. The space on South Hiiguera Street that the applicants want to occupy contains 4,500 square feet of floor area The applicants' proposed dance hall would be similar in scale to the three downtown nightclubs mentioned in the previous paragraph. Staff could have suggested that 4,500, rather than 4,000 square feet be the minimum allowed floor area for outlying nightclubs to differentiate the proposed nightclub from the others downtown. However, staff saw the 4,000 square feet as an reasonable floor area since these three nightclubs are significantly larger in size than the others included in the table and could be viewed as businesses of the type of scale that might be appropriate in outlying areas. The main difference between the proposed dance hall and the other establishments is that it is not also a restaurant and it is not proposed to be open during the daytime. Based on the levels of concern with the over concentration of drinking establishments in the downtown voiced at recent hearings, the idea of allowing some nightclubs in outlying areas may be acceptable. The use permit process would allow for the careful evaluation of individual requests to determine their appropriateness outside of downtown and the consistency of proposals with the intent of the general plan. 2, LUE Service Commercial Policies Policy 3.5.2 D. of the City's LUE identifies types of uses that are appropriate in areas designated Services and Manufacturing. One of the uses listed in Subsection D. is"some recreation facilities". Nightclubs as a conditionally allowed use appear to most closely fit in this category. The language"some recreation facilities" seems to be purposely ambiguous to allow some room for interpretation and to cover the wide range of uses that are not necessarily specifically listed in the LUE, but could be construed to fit under the umbrella of this use category. Amusement arcades, athletic and health clubs, fitness centers and game courts are allowed uses that would also fit under this category. Bars, taverns, bowling alleys and skating rinks are conditionally allowed uses that would best fit in this category as well. The proposed use with its larger floor area and focus on dancing, including classes, can be construed to be similar to these other recreation facilities in terns of locational needs and space requirements. Y4 Teat Amendment TA 87-96 Page 4 Because of the potential for noise, traffic and parking issues with all of these recreational uses, the preference would be to separate them from residential neighborhoods and other noise sensitive uses. Outlying service commercial zones would be appropriate areas for the proposed use in this regard. 3. Consistency with the Zoning Regulations The proposed use would currently be allowed in the C-S zone with an administrative use permit if it were classified as a bar or a specialized school that teaches dancing. The attached statement from the applicants indicates that the proposed operation is more of a dance club than a bar, with dancing, rather than alcohol, as the focus. Serving alcohol and teaching dancing are both components of the use, but it is the dance floor that clearly makes the use a nightclub in accordance with the City's zoning regulations. Like the other two uses mentioned, bars and specialty schools, Mitigation Measure No. 1 recommends that nightclubs be allowed with an administrative use permit. The proposed footnote includes the following language: "The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues." Through the use permit process, the City can either deny inappropriate requests to establish nightclubs on C-S sites or recommend conditions to mitigate concerns. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed amendment, based on inconsistency with the general plan. Planning Commission action is final unless appealed to the City Council. 2. Continue review with direction to the applicant and staff. OTHER DEPARTMENT CONDIENTS No other departments objected to the proposed change of use at the site. Specific requirements from other departments would be incorporated as conditions of use permit approval for individual requests for nightclubs. RECOMN[ENDATION Recommend the approval of the request to amend the text of the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone with the requirement for an administrative use permit and the addition of the following footnote to Section 17.22.010, Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, based on the following findings: Footnote In the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,000 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. ��y Teat Amendment TA 87-96 Page 5 Findings 1. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity because individual requests for nightclubs would require an administrative use permit and issues with traffic, noise and neighborhood compatibility would be properly evaluated. 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, given that only those larger nightclubs with a minimum of 4,000 square feet of floor area would be considered. 3. A Mitigative Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on July 17, 1996, which describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment subject to the mitigation measures shown in the attached initial study ER 87-96 being incorporated into the project. Attached: Applicants' Project Statement Table 1, List of Bars&Nightclubs Memo from C.R. Chelquist of the City Police Department Mitigation MeasurevInitial Study ER 87-96 List of allowed and conditionally allowed uses in the C-S zone Los7as.� 2 ) STATEMENT We "Cowboy Kenny' s" western dance facility are respectfully requesting your support for a "text amendment " to the zoning ordinance regarding our type of use in the C-S zone at 3046 S. Higuera Street , Suite A, San Luis Obispo. As background for this request , we would like to state for the record that we have followed current General Plan guidelines to attempt to locate our business in the downtown business core , however , to no avail . A western dance facility is unique in the sense that the dancing style . uses an inordinate almost open floor area compared to a typical bar with a small intimate dance floor . Multiple types of dancing can be occurring to the same music at the same time , such as couple dancing and "group" line dancing for example. The popularity of western style dancing has grown exponentially in the last four years , especially in rural counties/states such as our area. This is especially true with two colleges in the local community, with a large agricultural basis/emphasis . To say the least , our efforts to establish a business that can meet the demand for this type of venue has been very frustrating , both in the sense of available facilities as well as the regulatory requirements both in the county or city. From our survey and research , we have concluded that a San Luis Obispo city location would serve the greatest number of people and therefore the best potential for business success for ourselves. In pursuing this goal , we have found no facilities in the San Luis Obispo downtown core that could meet our needs . In reviewing the general plan guidelines and the zoning regulations, we took note of section 4. 3 of general plan language stating , "Cultural facilities , such as museums, galleries , and public theaters should be downtown. Entertainment facilities , such as nightclubs and private theaters should be in the downtown , too. Locations outside downtown may be more appropriate for facilities that would be out of character or too big for downtown to accommodate comfortably , such as the major performing arts center planned for the Cal Poly Campus. " Given this language, we state to you that in fact our facilities needs are "out of character" and "too big for downtown to accommodate comfortably" . Thus we respectfully submit this application for your review and consideration of our needs . We do not expect to receive a grant of special privileges and in fact feel that our proposal fits specifically into the general plan guideline intent as well as the spirit of the general plan to accommodate all -forms and venues of "entertainment and cultural facilities" . It is our goal to follow the applicable regulations and guidelines to establish what we believe will be a successful endeavor for both the community and ourselves . Your consideration of our proposal , we hope will validate in fact that the requested changes do "carry out the existing policies of the general plan" and the "zone change test amendment " requested proves to be the appropriate method for both yourselves and us to establish workable guidelines to recognize the flexibility and needs of a dynamic changing community . ZL a r 1—'lel y OM F®h ^_J " •. 7M.. @^ • fAn W L r.ur ranr'.mom. 1111 rs(crra.\'rr 1� SLOW IAN( 1AN:. SI.f)aV If I � V s / r � L � � S\S'IN(: I '.IaANI'.INL�, \ \ \ • i Av ' .� '•r/ � r I f�� YI a � 1 a _ d . IM r l I �l � �°i r I r•>Isrr:In•r: '� j 1 Courtesy On The Dance Floor \` 1 I.NI Jana Ikxna bxve rural Lr a-n+ylwn.fiw IIIX^ m' 0."mMI.11 a.ndi. Inln IIx muv am and an N the Juv yrc In armlet I I ha rntylwx al rwne.Share dx lYrx rYll nln+Jmxrn.0..11 vo11rl1nY daT ry+nan'. IY.x.Iry akrrnxlYlp ryfns Id dwnhlY wr+w 11y A,np. 4.ArItW ndlhwn.Alep a kwdl.twn(m the damrfa ahoJ It r.2 f rrryraalve dame,A..11 Iwrrylxaa nmmrn wk.kw rmtml nl arq+-M`ttr axdll If.-Alwhw rsrvn,gxJrym.Glrr rh Ilrc rUm'r Ilr.r aAhm p1ry nc,Ixrcnl d a drmix._.mkc. L r hl blwl•r Iln na,IIx•liru 1 nr a(tia vwuul dlr avlpr h dn•'1aa 7.Na ""a clY'ua+lr rw mhn IIphIN A*',.nlu dx Lbw, �` Lm• n Ix Iur tlx•'I'am9q..I'nlYa,l/Iply 11rp arxl.xlx r laa Ormr f_ /•�, Ix,ryy.�amr Jalu 1,'I Ir nry 1 m 5 kn anxxnl tl1.Ih.n I.dn• Y Wyly carry a Arlr14 rxwn tlx abase Jur. _�/� •J..v lan'Yhhw J,wrrr ry,yrr.arr aml .q, ,al, 9.A.kanlasle w,lamr..Inca YmrehJly laLv'r.�by an ami.+ 1.11u.tia lx xlimIn..S11"Ill,am[1'I.aal IN11vrn l'YIIIwr Dam'I+.Ilall to.l lla•nnlll..4CJ NMftn La llwwwn,-,x..A 11 lW1111 CC Ir 1.1 dK utwrr of dw MKI,1,frn Swing diminp M1 dle incl,lull GY linc.Wing,Faa A Slua d2ftm cal lx Ikw all aumax.Omm•n d dx vaL,L.fw Llrx dam'wgL m the dmlcc(kww alkrra dm In happen mwwwhly.in asp vdn 4.11ir minas 3IF whim fal dentin paaa 1711 Act m p im anfy n>U rnn pnin that on pmr diner AIYIf ibcm N MOM FO) WHAVONla 7 TABLE 1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO BARS AND NIGHTCLUBS Name Address Floor Area Zonis Breezes Pub& Grill 11560 Los Osos 2,900 square feet C-N; legal Valley Rd. # 160 nonconforming use The Graduate 990 Industrial Way 12,000 square feet M; legal nonconforming use McLintock's 686 Higuera Street 1,700 square feet C-C-H The Library 723 Higuera Street 1,600 square feet C-C-H Mother's Tavern 725 Higuera Street 4,400 square feet C-C-H Frog&Peach Pub 728 Higuera Street 2,280 square feet C-C-H SLO Brewing Co. 1119 Garden Street 4,270 square feet C-C-H Mc Carthy's 1019 Court Street 900 square feet C-C-H Tortilla Flats 1051 Nipomo Street 4,000 square feet C-C Mustang Tavern 1347 Monterey Street 2,000 square feet C-R Bull's Tavern 1032 Chorro Street 1,000 square feet C-C-H 9F _ c MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Pam Ricci Z,-,?4,VZ& VN FROM: C.R. Chelquist, Captain; ' 10" 'dT DATE: April 9, 1996 SUBJECT: Project Review (Bogdan & Shaw) on 4-9-96 I talked to both the applicants and received more detail about their proposed venture. I seems clear that they are attempting to attract the "older" and more dedicated western dance crowd. Mr. Shaw is a long time dance instructor and is active in the local clubs. I do think that he is trying to create a location with dancing as the primary draw. I do not think that he is just trying to sneak a bar in under the door. Based on the information I now have I would not anticipate that this project, if approved,would produce significant work for the Police Department. Given the location, on a heavily traveled street, I do have some traffic concerns. These concerns are heightened by the fact that alcohol will be served. While it is a minor issue I will also point out that we may see a number of minor parking lot accidents. Parking at the location is restricted and access lanes are narrow with some being dead ends. Mix a beer or two in and make it dark and I think we can count on losing a fender or two. I'Z/ INITIAL STUDY ER 87-96 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Bogdan-Shaw Text Amendment 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Pamela Ricci (805)781-7168 4. Project Location: Service Commercial (C-S) Zones Citywide 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: William Bogdan & Kenn Shaw 823 Via Estaban San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation Affected: Services & Manufacturing 7. Zoning Category Affected: Service Commercial (C-S) Zones Citywide S. Description of the Project: The applicants want to amend the text of the City's zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in Service Commercial (C-S) zones citywide. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Chapter 17.46 of the City's zoning regulations states the City's C-S zones are intended "to provide for storage, transportation and wholesaling, as well as 1-s2G certain retail sales and business services, which may be less appropriate in the City's other commercial zones." C-S zones are generally located in the southern part of the City along the Broad Street and South Higuera Street corridors. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. 7a� ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics X Population and Housing Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems Hazards Recreation Water X Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there x will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect(1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. July 17, 1996 21`69natur�/ Date Ronald Whisenand, Development Review Manager Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. Printed Name For EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7'�7 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 8756:Teta Amendment(CS zones citywide) Issuer Unless Impact Page 5 Mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a). Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1 X Land Use Element (LUE) ■ Policy 4.3 of the City's LUE of the general plan says that: 'GdhOwfacaves such as museums,ga0edes,and public theaters should be downtown. Entertainment faclrties, such as nightclubs and pdvate theaters should be in the downtown, too. Locations outside downtown may be more appropdate for faaTities that would be out of character or too big for downtown to accommodate comfortably, such as the major performing arts center planned for the Cal Poly campus.ff Conclusion: If it is possible to determine that there are different types of nightclubs that may have characteristics or space needs that are better suited to outlying locations, rather than downtown, then it may be possible to view the request as being consistent with the policy. Mitigation Measure: Approval of a change to the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone shall be contingent upon a Planning Commission use permit being required prior to establishment of the use. A footnote shall be added to Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, that states: In the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues.' ■ Policy 3.5.2 D. of the City's LUE identifies types of uses that are appropriate in areas designated Services and Manufacturing. One of the uses listed in Subsection D. is"some recreation facilities". Nightclubs as a conditionally allowed use appear to most closely fit in this category. Conclusion: The language "some recreation facilities' seems to be purposely ambiguous to allow some room for interpretation and to cover the wide range of uses that are not necessarily specifically listed in the LUE, but could be construed to fit under the umbrella of this use category. Amusement arcades, athletic and health clubs, fitness centers and game courts are allowed uses that would also fit under this category. Bars, taverns, bowling alleys and skating rinks are conditionally allowed uses that would best fit in this category as well. The proposed use with its larger floor area and focus on dancing, including classes, can be construed to be similar to these other recreation facilities in terms of locational needs and space requirements. Because of the potential for noise, traffic and parking issues with all of these recreational uses,the preference would be to separate them from residential neighborhoods and other noise sensitive uses. Outlying service commercial zones would be appropriate areas for the proposed use in this regard. b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies X adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 2 X �3d issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 87-96;Tent Amendment(C-S zones citywide) Issues Unless Impart Mitigation Page 6 Incorporated The City's zoning map indicates that there are areas zoned C-S that back up directly to residential areas. Many of these area have the"S", Special Consideration overlay zoning, attached to them. Because of the potential for noise, traffic and parking issues with nightclub uses, it would be best to locate them so that they are not immediately adjacent to residential uses. The mitigation measure suggested in Section a) above, which requires a use permit to establish a nightclub in the C-S zone and provides some guidance on types of issues that need to be addressed with use permit review, is adequate mitigation to address the concern with the compatibility of such uses. d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to X soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an X established community (including a low-income or minority community)? POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population X projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or X indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking? X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction) L X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X 7-3/ Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Bt 87-96.Tent Amendment IGS zones dtywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 7 Mitigation Incorporated e) Landslides or mudflows? X f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions X from excavation, grading or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? X h) Expansive soils? X i) Unique geologic or physical features? X 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the X rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards X such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of X surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X movements? y 3z Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 87-96:Text Amendment ICS zones citywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 8 Mitigation Incorporated f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through X direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X- 0 Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater X otherwise available for public water supplies? i. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an X existing or projected air quality violation (Compliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines)? Locating nightclubs in outlying areas will cause some to drive further, but trips will not typically be during peak traffic hours. In some cases, trips may actually be reduced since many newer residential subdivisions are in the southern part of the city where most of the C-S zones are located. b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause X any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? X 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? I I I I X Locating nightclubs in outlying areas will cause some to drive further, but trips will not typically be during peak traffic hours. In some cases, trips may actually be reduced since many newer residential subdivisions are in the southern part f the city where most of the C-S zones are located. 7-B Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 8756;Tent Amendment(CS zones citywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 9 Mitigation Incorporated b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves X or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment))? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? X Through the required use permit, the availability of adequate parking facilities for the nightclub use will be evaluated. e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X fl Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative X transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Through the required use permit, the need for facilities to promote alternative transportation will be evaluated. g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (e.g. compatibility X with San Luis Obispo Co. Airport Land Use Plan)? 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats X (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals or birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? X c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, X coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? X e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potential'„ Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues ER 87-98:Text Amendment ICS zones citywide) Unless Impact Mitigation Page 10 Incorporated S. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b) Use non-renewable resources in a we and inefficient X manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous X substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or X emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health X hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health X hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass X of trees? 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? X �� S Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 87-96;Text Amendment ICS zones citywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 11 Mitigation Incorporated Nightclubs, with dancing and amplified music, will increase the noise levels in the evening hours at sites when they are open for business. In general,the hours of operation for a nightclub will be during times when many other businesses will typically be closed. Nightclubs would not be appropriate on sites in the C-S zone immediately adjacent to residential uses unless noise levels could somehow be attenuated. Mitigation Measure: With consideration of the required use permit, plans for establishment of nightclubs at specific sites shall be reviewed to determine if there are sensitive noise receptors nearby, and whether building soundproofing will be required, or additional screening is needed between the project site and adjoining lots. b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X With the establishment of a nightclub, people may be exposed to increased noise levels as discussed immediately above in Section a). 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? X The Fire Department sets occupancy limitations on nightclubs and notifies applicants on any specific requirements to improve existing or planned facilities for assembly occupancies to provide better fire protection. b) Police protection) X The Police Department is usually directly impacted by the establishment of new nightclub uses. Through the required use permit,the Police Department will review security plans and suggest any necessary conditions to help lessen the impact on their services. c) Schools? X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X e) Other governmental services? X 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? X b) Communications systems? X 734 issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 87-96:Text Amendment ICS zones citywide) Mitigation Page 12 Incorporated c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? X d) Sewer or septic tanks? X e) Storm water drainage? X f) Solid waste disposal? X Through the required use permit, the need for facilities to handle both garbage and recycling will be evaluated. g) Local or regional water supplies? X 'ightclubs may increase water demand at some locations; they would be required to offset their increased water demand a manner consistent with adopted City policies. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X c) Create light or glare? X 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? X c) Affect historical resources? X .1 Have the potential to cause a physical change which X would affect unique ethnic cultural values? 7-3J Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Leas Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact 6i 87-96;Tent Amendment(CS zones citywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 13 Mitigation Incorporated e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the X potential impact areal TT 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks X or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X The proposed request may be viewed as expanding recreational opportunities. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, X to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? In this case, short-term and long-term environmental goals are the same. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, X but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) With the requirement for an administrative use permit to establish a nightclub, the potential to cumulatively impact air quality and noise to a significant degree can be evaluated. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 7�� issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact 61 87-96;Tent Amendment(C-S zones citywide) Mitigation Page 14 Incorporated 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Final EIR: Land Use Element/Circulation Element Updates, August 1994. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site- specific conditions of the project. Not applicable. Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990). 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 1 City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Element, August 1994. 2 City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Map, April 1996. 3 4 5 Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Lose Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Bi 87-96;Text Amendment(CS zones citywide) Issues Unless Impact Page 15 Mitigation Incorporated 19. MITIGATION MEASURES/MONITORING PROGRAM 1 Mitigation Measure: Approval of a change to the zoning regulations to allow nightclubs in the C-S zone shall be contingent upon a Planning Commission use permit being required prior to establishment of the use. A footnote shall be added to Table 9, Uses Allowed by Zone, that states: `9n the C-S zone, nightclubs must contain a minimum of 4,500 square feet of floor area. The required use permit process shall address parking, neighborhood compatibility and security issues. Monitorina Program: The Planning Commission and City Council must determine that the proposed amendment is consistent with LUE policy. The suggested footnote has been designed to insure this. 2 Mitigation Mea .r With consideration of the required use permit, plans for establishment of nightclubs at specific sites shall be reviewed to determine if there are sensitive noise receptors nearby, and whether building soundproofing will be required, or additional screening is needed between the project site and adjoining lots. Monitoring Program: Through the review of the required use permit, the Hearing Officer would determine whether a specific request adequately addressed noise considerations. Planning staff would monitor any noise mitgations through review of project plans and inspection of sites prior to occupancy. The above mitigation measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Section 15070(b)(1) of the California Administrative Code requires the applicant to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is released for public review. I hereby agree to the mitigation measures and monitoring program outlined above. Applicant Date I�� Illlll i:• i�. :i' .I a �V�7s///T k4is oaspcoa Community Development Department, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 XII. SERVICE-COMMERCIAL (C-S) ZONE This is a summary of provisions governing uses allowed in the Service-Commercial (C-S) zone. Consult the City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations for additional information. Date Revised: October, 1994 1. Allowed Uses: • Advertising & related services (graphic design, writing, mailing, addressing, etc.) • Ambulance services • Amusement arcades (See Section 17.08.060) • Animal hospitals, boarding, and grooming (small animals) • Athletic and health clubs, fitness centers, game courts • Auto repair & related services (body, brake, transmissions, muffler shops; painting, etc.) • Auto sound system installation • Broadcast studios • Building and landscape maintenance services • Caretaker's quarters • Carwash -self-service • Catering services • Computer services • Construction activities • Contractors - all types of general and special building contractor's offices • Contractor's yards • Credit reporting and collection • Delivery and private postal services • Detective and security services • Equipment rental • Exterminators and fumigators • Feed stores and farm supply sales • Government agency corporation yards • Laboratories (medical, analytical research) • Laundry/dry cleaners -cleaning plant -pick-up point • Offices (engineering) engineers, architects, and industrial design • Photocopy services-, quick printers • Photofinishing - retail • Photofinishing - wholesale, and blueprinting and microfilming services • Photographic studios • Post offices and public and private postal services • Printing and publishing • Produce stands • Repair services -small household appliances, locksmith, seamstress, shoe repair -large appliance, electrical equipment power tools, saw sharpening yi X 1 . service-Commercial (C-S) Zone - Page 2 • Retail sales and rental - autos, trucks, motorcycles, RV's • Retail sales - appliances, furniture and furnishings, musical instruments, processing equipment, business, office and medical equipment stores, catalog stores, sporting goods, outdoor supply. • Retail sales - auto parts and accessories except tires and batteries as principal use • Retail sales - tires and batteries • Retail sales-outdoor sales of building and landscape materials (lumber yards,nurseries,etc.) • Retail sales - indoor sales of building materials and gardening supplies (floor and wall coverings, paint, glass stores, etc.) • Retail sales and rental - boats, aircraft, mobile homes • Retail sales and repair of bicycles • Service stations • Tire recapping • Trailer rental • Trucking/taxi service - • Utility companies -Corporation yards • Utility distribution facilities (See Section 17.08.080) • Vending machines (See Section 17.08.050) • Warehousing, mini-storage, moving companies • Water treatment services • Wholesale and mail order houses 2. Uses Allowed with Director's or Chief Building Official's A royal b Letter • Mobile home as temporary residence at building site • Outdoor sales of Christmas trees and other seasonal agricultural products 3. Uses Allowed by Director's Aooroval of an Administrative Use Permit: • Animal hospitals and boarding, grooming, training (large animals) • Antennas (commercial broadcasting) • Bars, taverns, etc. (without entertainment facilities) • Barbers, hairstylists, manicurists, tanning centers • Bowling alleys • Bus stations • Cabinet and carpentry shops • Car wash -mechanical • Churches, synagogues, temples, etc. • Circuses, carnivals, fairs, festivals, parades on private property • Concurrent sales of alcoholic beverages and motor fuel • Day care - day care center • Gas distributors - containerized (butane, propane, oxygen, acetylene, etc.) • Laundry/dry cleaners -self-service • Manufacturing -food, beverages;ice;apparel; electronic, optical, instrumentation products; jewelry; musical instruments-, sporting goods; art materials • Organizations (professional, religious, political, labor, fraternal, trade, youth, etc.) offices and meeting rooms • Parking (as a principal use) • Railroad yards, stations, crew facilities • Restaurants, sandwich shops, takeout food, etc. �- yz Xfl. Service-Commerciai (C-S) Zone - Page 3 • Retail sales - groceries, liquor, and specialized foods (bakery, meats, dairy items, etc.) • Schools -business, trade, recreational, or other specialized schools • Secretarial & related services Icourt reporting, stenography, typing, telephone answering, etc.) • Tattoo Parlors • Temporary sales • Temporary uses - not otherwise listed • Ticket/travel agencies • Utility companies -engineering & administration offices • Veterinarians 4. Uses Allowed by Planning Commission Anoroval of a Use Permit: • Airports & related facilities • Amusement parks, fairgrounds. • Cemeteries, mausoleums, columbariums • Drive-in theaters • Homeless shelters • Hot tubs - commercial use • Mineral extraction • Public assembly facilities (community meeting rooms, auditoriums, conventionlexhibition halls) • Retail sales-general merchandise (drug,hardware, discount,department and variety stores) • Skating rinks • Stadiums • Swap meets • Swimming pools (public) 5. Any other uses are not allowed. 7- y3