The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/18/2003, BUS 3 - PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE AIRPORT AREA AND MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLANS AND EIR council MmWgD� j, acEnaa Report 1W.N.ba 3 C I T Y OF SAN L U IS O B I S P O FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Directo Prepared By: Michael Draze, Deputy Director of Community Dev pmentl__� SUBJECT: PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE AIRPORT AREA AND MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLANS AND EIR CAO RECOMMENDATION Endorse adjustments to the draft Airport Area and Margarita Area Specific Plans to address stakeholder cost concerns, and direct staff to proceed to hearings on the.plans and EIR by September 2003 for the Margarita Area Specific Plan and January 2004 for the Airport Area Specific Plan.. REPORT-IN-BRIEF As a part of the process of preparing the Margarita Area Specific Plan and .the Airport Area Specific Plan, public review draft plans and a draft environmental impact report (EIR) were circulated. Comments were received on these drafts. The Airport Land Use Commission requested substantial changes to the draft Margarita Area Specific Plan. Unocal prepared a detailed evaluation of the proposed infrastructure cost and financing recommendation, and there were many comments on the draft EIR. In response to these inputs to the planning process, several changes to the initial draft plans and draft EIR are required. The Council has already considered the modifications to the draft Margarita Area Specific Plan as a result of working with the Airport Land Use Commission. These changes result in changes needed to the draft EIR. In response to cost concerns, changes are called for in the infrastructure plans. The land uses in the draft Airport Area Specific Plan need minor adjustments to insure consistency with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan. State law requires formal responses to all comments made on the draft EIR. The modifications now recommended to complete the process are explained in more detail below to provide the Council with information that will be useful when the Council considers a request for the funding to do the work as set forth in the Mid-Year budget review. If Council accepts the modifications outlined below, then the EIR will be revised accordingly and the specific plans will proceed toward Planning Commission hearings. The public hearings will be far more productive if the plans are considered feasible by property owners. 6 - I T Council Agenda Report—AASP/MASP REVISIONS Page 2 DISCUSSION Cost Reduction Strategies Drainage Plan Changes The original Storm Drainage Master Plan prepared as a part of the AASP included a couple of features that staff assumed the development community would find beneficial. Those were: a) all properties would be protected from inundation from the 100-year storm event; and b) each property would be allowed to fully utilized their entire site for development without setting aside land for on-site storm water detention facilities. The Plan proposed a master detention basin near the downstream end of the system, out of the specific plan area, that would mitigate the impact of increased storm water flows to San Luis Creek. The cost of providing this master system, over $6 million for the Airport and Margarita areas alone, was proportioned to the areas receiving benefit including the Orcutt Area, and existing parts of the City. Several owners within the AASP objected that the storm drainage costs, in conjunction with the ,other cost requirements of the specific plan, rendered the plans financial infeasible. They also stated that full utilization of their property was not a goal; in fact most of the AASP owners only planned to develop about 60% of the site. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (GASP) property planners objected to their share of the costs of a master planned system; also stating that the costs were excessive and that they could design a sub-regional system that would provide the same benefits at a much lower cost. Finally, the location of the proposed master planned detention basin became problematic because, no matter where shown, the owner of the property objected (meaning that the use of eminent domain would most likely be necessary in order to obtain the site). Given the feelings of property owners and the likelihood that the Storm Drainage Master Plan would face near unanimous opposition, staff proposed an extension of the existing on-site storm drainage design criteria. The criteria that will govern all future development in all areas are fairly simple. Post development storm water runoff, up to and including the 100-year storm event, cannot exceed the runoff calculated for a 2-year storm event from the site when it was undeveloped. All storm water exceeding that amount must be temporarily stored on-site or in a shared basin and slowly drained off the site at a rate not to exceed the 2-year storm event rate. This proposal appears to work for all interested parties. Because runoff will be metered to the predevelopment levels, the overall impacts to San Luis Creek by full build out remain the same: no significant impact. Thus the need for a storm drainage master plan no longer exists. The new criterion would provide equal, or better, protection to downstream property owners and San Luis Creek. It would not remove AASP properties from the 100-year flood plain and it would not allow full economic development of properties within the AASP. However; it would significantly reduce the overall cost of development and would strengthen the prospects that multiple properties within the AASP will approve the plan and move forward with adoption and annexation. 3 � Council Agenda Report—AASP/MASP REVISIONS Page 3 Transportation Facilities Changes Other issues reviewed that, with modification, could result in significant reductions in impact fees include delays in the median improvements for Broad Street south of Prado Road (about $2 million), and Tank Farm Road between Santa Fe and Broad Streets (about $1.5 million), the delaying of those portions of the bicycle route on the former storm drainage system facilities (about $1 million), and delaying undergrounding of utilities (about $4 million). The median improvements and class I and H bicycle paths along approximately a mile of Tank Farm Road, as shown on the attached map, would be completed as part of the initial specific plan financing. The requirement for the delayed improvements would remain in the specific plans but most would be accomplished along with project development. Adequate rights-of-way for the medians would be acquired with development but the median improvements would be completed as grant funded or capital projects. Any gaps in the bicycle paths and utility undergrounding not built as part of private development could be completed through grant funding or use of other City and County resources (staff has been working with the County to possibly pool resources for undergrounding). Minor Land Use Boundary Changes Since completion of the draft EIR and draft Margarita Area Specific Plan, the Airport Land Use Commission completed a major update to the San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) that affected the Margarita Area Specific Plan. The previous ALUP provided for only a very low intensity of residential development in the Margarita Area. The revised ALUP now allows for up to 800 dwellings, but it required a substantial rearrangement of the land uses. These changes result in corresponding changes to the EIR's project description. Also, several of the property owners in the Margarita area are clearly ready and able to proceed with development of their property. This would provide sites for critically needed housing in short distance to existing city services. Because of this there is a need to proceed with revising the EIR as soon as possible. Unocal, the largest private property owner in the airport area expressed a concern that the draft specific plan provided for more Business Park than the market can possibly absorb in the next 20 years. In addition, a large portion of the Unocal property initially proposed for Business Park uses was restricted from the higher population density typical of business parks when the Airport Land Use Commission revised the Airport Land Use Plan in 2001. City economic development staff agreed that adjusting the boundaries of Business Park and Service Commercial areas on the Unocal property is important to the annexation and ultimate development of the property. Staff is reviewing the Airport Land Use Plan maps and will be adjusting the specific plan land use boundaries to better reflect the needs in the area. Revised Schedule The schedule to complete the two specific plans and the EIR has been changed to reflect the modifications noted above and will not be completed until fiscal year 2003-04. This schedule also assumes that some staff work for the remainder of this fiscal year will be augmented by contracts and that staffing vacancies in the Long Range Planning Division will be filled shortly 5 -3 Council Agenda Report—AASP/MASP REVISIONS Page 4 after the 2003-2005 budget is adopted. Costs to produce hearing documents and to cover completion of the public hearings will be included in the 2003-2005 budget requests. • Complete the project change-order with the EIR consultant Feb. 2003 • Complete agreement with Goodwin Assoc. for Financial Plan revisions March 2003 • Public review draft EIR ready to circulate May 2003 • Complete hearing draft of MASP July 2003 • Complete Draft EIR August 2003 • Begin public hearings on MASP and EIR Sept. 2003 • Council adoption of MASP and EIR Dec. 2003 • Complete hearing draft of AASP Dec. 2003 • Begin public hearings on AASP January 2004 • Council adoption of AASP April 2004 As noted in the above schedule, staff envisions running the MASP slightly ahead of the AASP. This is because the property owners of the Margarita area have already developed plans for subdivisions of their property and are anxious to proceed where we have seen no proposals to develop property in the Airport area. In addition, the original reason to proceed with the Airport area first was because the Airport Land Use Commission has serious problems with the Margarita area proposals and that has now been resolved. CONCURRENCES Staff members from Public Works, Utilities, Finance, and Administration have been involved in the meetings leading up to the proposed changes and concur that this approach is both more realistic in its eventual outcome and will result in improved development of the Margarita and Airport areas over the long term. FISCAL IMPACT As detailed in the Mid-Year Budget Request, the cost of completing the EIR and related plans to the public hearing phase is $80,000. Of this amount, Unocal and King Ventures have agreed to provide an additional $40,000 at this time to keep the efforts moving. This money will be deducted from future impact fees resulting in a General Fund impact of$40,000. The City will recover the requested costs to complete the EIR and plans through development fees paid as the property owners in the specific plan areas develop their property. Although the City has helped fund the planning to date through a combination of grants and loans from the general fund, seven of the property owners have already contributed $155,000 toward the effort, including the $30,000 from Unocal. With regard to the added $20,000 from Unocal, they have asked that it be returned, if an Airport Area Specific Plan is not adopted within two years. Staff believes this is reasonable, given that Unocal has already contributed $30,000 to this effort and two years should be ample time to adopt the specific plan. 3 - 4 Council Agenda Report—AASP/MASP REVISIONS Page 5 Funding S Current Requested Total Water Fund 100,000 100,000 Sewer Fund 100,000 100,000 CDBG 171,000 171,000 Property Owners 155,000 40,000 195,000 General Fund 191,000 40,000 231,000 Total $717,000 $80,000 $797,000 NEXT STEP As noted early in this report, the Council's action on this item is step in considering approval of additional funding to complete the Margarita and Airport Area specific plans and their corresponding EIR. The changes to be made with the additional funding requested are in response to State mandated processes and property owner comments that are vital to successfully completing the plans. The resulting plans and final EIR will be the products that are presented to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendations to the Council. ALTERNATIVES 1. Defer the request to the 2003 — 2005 budget. There does not appear to be any financial advantage to deferring this action. There is no reason to believe that there will be any additional sources of funding in the next fiscal year and the costs for completing this project will only increase. In addition, the property owners in the Margarita area who have already been annexed to the City are anxious to continue processing their projects and that can only be done if the EIR and specific plan is complete. Deferring the completion of the plans will also result in inefficiencies that will come with staff changes that occur over time in the various consultant firms involved with the plans and the EIR. 2. Implement it in a different way. The alternative to funding the contract services is to complete the necessary work with City staff. This would require the participation of several departments. Given the declining staff resources and the other high priority assignments these same staff are currently dedicated to (including updating the City budget, the Copeland, Marketplace, Costco, and Housing Element update projects, reassigning existing resources will result adverse effects to other high priority work. Additional staffing to complete the specific plans, although the staff person presently carrying the primary workload on these projects (Glen Matteson) is retiring in February. The current hiring freeze and budget shortfalls may prevent refilling that position until at least July, perhaps longer. The Community Development Department is reserving about $8,000 in contract services to try and minimize a loss in momentum in completing the specific plans. That funding was intended to fund staff resources to process the Orcutt Area Specific Plan application. Staff is J '� Council Agenda Report—AASP/MASP REVISIONS Page 6 recommending that this funding be directed to the Airport and Margarita Area specific plans because these plans are at a critical stage in their completion. 3. Continue the status quo. No action would mean that the projects are stalled. This would not be consistent with City policy on annexation and a major City goal of implementing programs to achieve the City's housing goals, or with previous actions by the Council to fund and complete these projects. Attachments: 1. Map of Potential Specific Plan Changes LABudgeACAG SP-EIR changes020703.doc 3- LP r . ' sm . .♦ ��..` , 'Almy WS 111- -��•�-' �{��il„�:1��. �,.�� d� NO� oil 7�,,�` ,off I■��Ir' �� OEM o` - ,, 1�1:I��r�l. r�� fl • Ij�r/ii7�■ 'r iy :r r '' i' 1;1'1" �'. �•� 1'14:x'■:■,■- -i�.. �1'!�,�'SIG•°•�»lil�j� ��• I��yp�, `II .. r''•.,..; •num...?. ''-v �. — !num.______:-meq► __-_ � �.�=noun..�_.//I■ `c. .:'L'I - �� :..1.11.,• - ��► — / • � '��:111111�/'`�� illll•C �� - --FEB.18.2009— 4:58PPl7--KING VENTURES N0.367 P.1/1 RED FILE _ RECEIVED M I G AGENDA i FEB 18 2003 DATE DITEM #IL S,_� SLO CITY CLERK February 18, 2003 v E N T Ue5FIS Via Facsimile: (805) 781-7109 Total One (1) Page Mayor David Romero and Councilmembers Via Mr. Ken Hampian CITY of SAN LUIS OBISPO 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401-3249 Re: Margarita Area Specific Plan and Final EIR for the Airport Area 17ear Mayor and Councilmembers: Please accept this letter to confirm a discussion I had with Dave Watson, Ken Hampian and John Mandeville on February 5th concerning the completion of the Final EIR for the Margarita and Airport Specific Plan Areas. We were one of the original property owners to support the city's request to assist financially with the preparation and certification of the EIR for these consolidated areas.As of this date, we understand that the city requires an additional $80,000 to complete the Final EIR. During our meeting we indicated to your staff that we would contribute an additional $20,000 on behalf of the Margarita Area as an advance against our processing and impact fees. We have reviewed your staff report and recommendations, and offer our continuing support to their proposals to bring these projects to their conclusion. We are also working with staff to process our pending subdivision for the Margarita Area, and we hope to bring that project forward on the heels of the FEIR and final adoption of the Specific Plan later this year. It is very important to us to maintain the timeframes suggested in tonight's staff report, and in that context, we will do everything we can to assist on these matters. Thank you for taking these comments Into consideration, We look forward to the conclusion of the FEIR process and the review of our subdivision applications. rely ' --kfflao ErCOUNC L 7_PCDD DIR ICAO L2 FIN DIA CACAO r FIRE CHIEF JoE. ng PTATTORNEY PW DIR ZCLERK/ORIG Z POLICE CHF eC: Mike Draze, Planning Department ° D In RTC DIR mtnAa 2RIn ID RIR King Ventures 290 Pismo Stria't San Luis Map.CA 93401 Eos s i q q q44 605 5445637 FAX Feb 14 03 03: 44p Uncal [8051547-5444 p. 2 Unocal corporation Real Estate,Remediation Services RED FILE Mining Operations and Carbon 276 Tank Farm Road,P.O.Box 1069 LEEIVED MEETING AGENDA San Luise bispo,(805) California 93406 Telephone(805) 84-04 3 1U2UU3 Facsimile(805)784-0493 �DATE. l ' ITEM # uS3ITY CLERK UNOCAL:�6T! February 14, 2003 Mr. Ken Hampian City of San Luis Obispo William J.Almas 990 Palm Street Operations Team ManagerSan LUIS ObispoCA 93401-3249 Operations.Real Estate and Remediation Services , Re: San Luis Obispo Tank Farm Annexation Via: Fax&U.S. Mail Dear Mr.Hampian: Pursuant to our conversations and agreements made in our telephone conversation of February 7, 2003, I am restating Unocal's expectations related to prepayment of$20,000 of annexation fees to the City of San Luis Obispo. Unocal will agree to prepay $20,000 for use in funding EIR revisions associated with the Airport Annexation Plan if the City can make the following commitments. • Prepayment of fees will be credited dollar for dollar for future fees associated with annexation to the City. The fees will run with the land to subsequent buyers or developers of the land. o If the City is unsuccessful in obtaining adoption of the Airport Area Specific Plan in a period exceeding two years from now (March 1, 2005) the City will refund the $20,000 in prepaid fees. As expressed in our telephone conversation, Unocal anticipates conversations with the City concerning ways of expediting preparation and review of development applications for land within the airport annexation area. We look forward to working with the City to find ways of shortening the time period necessary to finalize the annexation plan and review development proposals. We appreciate the professionalism and cooperation of the City staff in dealing with these issues thus far. Hopefully, this letter accurately portrays our discussions. If you have any questions concerning this matter,please contact rite at 784-0494. Very y ou William J 1Z COUNC L ,C�-i'CDD DIR cc: Ken.Smith,Unocal [?CAO K FIN DIR Michael Morris, AMB fd ACAO l?FIRE CHIEF f3'ATTORNEY ZPW DIR Rick Rittenberg, Cannon Associates aCLERK/ORIG Z;'POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS j2•REC DIR -� (;�-Lr%DIR t 2'HR DIR