Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/20/1996, C-2 - PD AND ANNEX 46-96: PREZONING OF A 3.85-ACRE SITE ON THE EAST SIDE OF BROAD STREET, SOUTH OF TANK FARM ROAD (IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE STATE FARM OFFICE SITE). A] council J76 aaGEnaa Report CITY OF SAN LU IS OBIS P O 7 FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Prepared By: Judith Lautn , Associate Planner SUBJECT: PD and ANNEX 46-96: Prezoning of a 3.85-acre site on the east side of Broad Street, south of Tank Farm Road (immediately adjacent to the State Farm Office site). CAO RECOMMENDATION Grant final passage to Ordinance No. 1303 (1996 Series), as introduced on July 23, 1996, amending the zoning of the property from County Single-Family Residential and Service Commercial to Medium-Density Residential, with a Specific Plan and a Planned Development (R- 2-SP-PD) and Service Commercial, with a Specific Plan and Special Considerations (C-S-SP-S). DISCUSSION The City Council introduced Ordinance 1303 on July 23, 1996. The ordinance amends the zoning map for an area of about four acres south of the southeast corner of Tank Farm Road and Broad Street (Highway 227), to Medium-Density Residential, with a Specific Plan and Planned Development, and to Service Commercial, with a Specific Plan and Special Considerations. The zoning map amendment will go into effect upon final approval of annexation of the property by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). Attached: Ordinance 1303, as introduced. ORDINANCE NO. 1303(1996 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS MAP TO DESIGNATE 1)A 3.15-ACRE SITE,ON THE EAST SIDE OF BROAD STREET,SOUTH OF TANK FARM ROAD,MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL,WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAYS (R-2-PD-SP),AND 2)A 0.7-ACRE SITE,IN THE SAME LOCATION,SERVICE COMMERCIAL, WITH SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAYS(C-S-S-PD), CONTINGENT UPON FINAL APPROVAL OF ANNEXATION OF THE SITE (R 46-96) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 26, 1996 and recommended approval of amendments to the Zoning Regulations map;and WHEREAS,the City Council conducted a public hearing on July 23, 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 map amendments are consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element(LUE)map and text,because a)Medium-Density Residential zoning is consistent with the Medium-Density Residential land use designation on the LUE map and Service Commercial zoning is consistent with the Services and Manufacturing land use designation on the LUE map,b) prezoning and annexation of the site is consistent with LUE policies on annexation,and c)the land use designations are consistent with those indicated in the Edna-Islay Specific Plan for this part of the "Secondary Planning Area" (Figure 27);and WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the map amendments are consistent with 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 as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City council finds an determines that the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed Zoning map amendment,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: Mitigation Measures: 1. The access easement to the future bicycle-pedestrian path from El Capitan shall be a minimum of fifteen feet wide, to accommodate an eight-foot-wide pathway for both bicycles and pedestrians. e-61 Ordinance no. 1303 (1996 Series) R 46-96 850 El Capitan Page 2 2. Noise reduction techniques shall be incorporated into the subdivision design to reduce noise exposure to the two residences closest to Highway 227 to below 60 Ldn. Techniques used shall be consistent with recommendations in the Noise Element and Noise Guidelines. SECTION 2. The Zoning map amendment R 46-96, designating the residentially-designated site R-2-PD-SP as shown on the attached Exhibit A, is hereby approved, based on the following findings: Findines- I. The design provides facilities or amenities suited to a particular occupancy group, specifically moderate-income families, which would not be feasible under conventional zoning, because the narrow lots combined with simple small three- bedroom homes allows room for large back yards and adequate living room for children. 2. The planned development provides more affordable housing than would be possible with conventional development, because the narrow lots allow potential to reach the medium-density limits of the site, while the lot designs emulate low-density development. 3. Features of the particular design achieve the intent of conventional standards for privacy, usable open space, adequate parking, and compatibility with neighborhood character, as well as or better than the standards themselves, because the "neo- traditional" concepts included in the plan make the best use of the site, by use of rear garages, front porches, and narrow lots, to foster a sense of community. and subject to the following Conditions- Right-of-way: 1. The property to be annexed shall be of sufficient size to provide for a 53'-wide public street right-0f--way (El Capitan),If the applicant cannot obtain permission, from the owners of some portions of the El Capitan road, to offer those properties as right-of- way to the City, to include the road property in the annexation and to develop street improvements within it, the City may choose to use its powers of condemnation to di-3 Ordinance no. 1303 (1996 Series) R 46-96 850 El Capitan Page 3 obtain the property. In such a case, the applicant will be responsible for all costs of acquisition, including legal and court fees. Utilities: 2. All existing structures currently served by sewer septic systems may remain on said systems until the septic system fails or the property is redeveloped. At that time, the sewer systems will be required to be abandoned and existing and new structures connected to the city's sewer system. Applicable sewer impact fees will be required to be paid at that time. 3. Existing water wells may remain in use until the time of redevelopment. Upon redevelopment, water well use shall comply with the City policies in effect at that time. All new structures shall connect to the City's water system and shall be required to pay all applicable water impact fees at that time. Open space: 4. A 15'-wide minimum easement shall be provided, and an eight-food-wide pathway constructed from the street through the open space parcel to connect to the railroad right-of-way, adjacent to the east. Density: 5. Density is hereby transferred from the open space parcel, minus the area between the banks of the creek, to allow a maximum of 2.00 density units per residential lot Screening: 6. A minimum 10'-wide landscape screen shall be installed at the rear of lots adjacent to the State Farm site to the north, to minimize effects of noise and glare from the parking lot. SECTION 3. The Zoning map amendment R 46-96,designating the commercially-designated site C-S-S-SP as shown on the attached Exhibit A, is hereby approved, based on the following findings: Findings: Ordinance no. 1303 (1996 Series) R 46-96 850 El Capitan Page 4 1. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and Edna-Islay Specific Plan maps, which call for medium-density residential and service .commercial zoning on the site, in the proportions and in the locations shown in the submittal. 2. The Special Considerations zone, in this case, is intended to assure conformance with the general plan and its implementing ordinances, consistent with the intent of the Special Considerations zone, as described in Section 17.56.010 of the Municipal Code. and subject to the following Special consideration; 1. The drive-through convenience store use does not conform with City regulations. Those elements of it that are nonconforming, including the drive-through, must be eliminated and made to conform with current zoning standards in the event of any of the following: a. Any significant change or modification to the use. For purposes of this requirement, "significant' change means any remodeling of ten percent or more of the building or any expansion of the building of ten percent or more. b. Vacancy for six months or longer. If the building is unoccupied for at least six months continuously. C. Sale or lease. Any sale or any lease of over 35 years. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of the Council Members voting for and against, shall be published at least five(5) prior to its final passage, in the Telegram- Tribune,a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect upon final approval of annexation of the site by the Local Agency Formation Commission. INTRODUCED AMID PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at a meeting held on the 23rd day of .Tule on motion of Council Member Romero seconded by Vice Mayor Williams and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Romero, Williams, Smith and Mayor Settle NOES: Council Member Roalman ��z s Ordinance no. 1303 (1996 Series) R 46-96 850 El Capitan Page 5 ABSENT: None ATTEST: C' Clerk Bonnie L awf Mayor Allen Settle APPROVED: rn MEETIPX ,AGENDA DATE - 9ITEM # RICHARD SCHMIDT 112 Broad Street,San Luis Obispo, 09340 OUNE3CIL CDD DIR 010:rschmtdt Ddu k0'V'70RNEY ACAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF August 20, 1996 ❑ PW DIR LERKIORIG ❑ POLICE CHF Re: Aug. 20 Agenda, Miscellaneous Items ❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR ❑ QFILE ❑ UTIL DIR 1 To the City Council: ❑ PERS DIR -, Looking through your agenda packet, I am appalled at the lack of information staff provides you and how the agenda packets have been dumbed down (or should it be Dunned down) so that you couldn't possibly understand what you are doing based on the information provided. I am also appalled at the overwhelmingly propagandistic nature of the "information" being provided. Further, be it said that if other information is being provided to you to supplement the scanty stuff in you packet, the public doesn't have access to that information, and thus the public is being shut out -- by Dunn and company -- of having any meaningful role in understanding the business that is carried out in the public's name. Finally, I am amazed at the ease with which the current administration has bamboozled the five of you into dismantling San Luis Obispo as we have known it, with nary a word of caution that such is actually what you are up to. When I looked at the current agenda, I was dizzy with the number of major changes you are talking about approving as if they were routine weekly business. I BELIEVE IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT THIS IS THE MOST RECKLESSLY OUT OF CONTROL COUNCIL I HAVE ENCOUNTERED IN 26 YEARS OF LOCAL RESIDENCY. EVEN THE RAMPANTLY PRO-GROWTH DUNIN/RAPPA COUNCIL WOULD HAVE BLUSHED TO DO WHAT YOU DO WEEKLY, AND THE INFAMOUS COOPER COUNCIL NEVER WOULD HAVE TRIED. You have accomplished this all the while believing that the public is wholly behind what you do: you are very mistaken, for the public is angry beyond belief, but feels helpless because you have closed your wagons around the pro-growth/pro-business aristocratic politician "managers" who now run the city and have made it so difficult for the real public to have a hearing of their concerns that most have simply given up. That no one is willing to run against the incumbents is not a sign of approval, it is an indication of total revulsion and disgust and a surrender to defeatism due to the pointlessness of even attempting to speak in opposition. Such sentiments are not confined to persons like myself-- I still make an effort to speak truth to you, after all -- but are the common property of thousands of others far less sophisticated in city affairs than we are. A few more specific comments on agenda items: m _ RECE. 2VE AUG 2 i 199A CITY CLERK _ s C-2. Annexation on South Broad. It seems we have one annexation after another these days. Why, other than to enable certain land speculators realize huge profits off their speculations? What public good is served by this? Of course, there's no map in the packet, so who knows what you're talking about? The open space is so poorly defined I can't figure out what's being dedicated, or where. Surely this will result in a situation that is wholly unenforceable, yet certain incumbents will be able to campaign on having acquired an open space dedication in return for annexation, and how we then need more annexations to accomplish more of the same. C-3 Carwashes on every corner in the CN zone. Bravo. We really need this. Wholly consistent with the Dunn program of erasing every difference between San Luis Obispo and West Covina or Santa Maria in the interests of promoting business. What's next? Drive-through restaurants? C-9. Santa Rosa Street Bridge. No indication of the effects on the creek, or the large trees near the bridge. Would be nice to know more. Do you understand the environmental effects? The public sure cannot understand based on the staff report. Since engineering's been trying to get rid of these trees for years, one suspects the worst. 2. Selling fire house. This is where "running government like a business" gets us -- a totally amoral approach in which long-term city assets are regarded simply as real estate to be disposed of to the highest bidder. Has the city considered adaptive reuse of the firehouse while retaining city ownership? Might this not be better in the long run than trying to dispose of the property during a real estate slump? Could the city ever repurchase such property for less than what it will get by selling it now? What about the city's fiduciary obligation to its own history? I have written to you before -- though, per usual, one might as well not waste one's time.-- about the unique structural nature of the engine house, with its radiating truss roof structure -- a structure so unusual that many of the old-time structural engineering faculty at Cal Poly would make field trips to the site just to show it to students. The engine house space is remarkable. Take out the engines, and it could be a museum, playhouse, or whatever. Does the city not have interest in using its surplus resources to further the cultural life of the city? (Remember, the Dunn crew was dragged kicking and screaming into not quickly demolishing the library, now the SLO City Playhouse.) Are all city assets merely entry lines on some twerp's ledger sheet, and nothing more? You're nuts if you sell this building. Sincerely, Richard Schmidt — A., Zo -►k i 5cZ-