HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/01/2003, PH4 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY'S ZONING MAP FROM C-S-SP TO C-S-SP-PD, AND SUBDIVIDE A COMMERCIAL BUILDIN council °°° 14/1
j, acEnba Report
CITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development.Direct
Prepared By: Tyler Corey, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY'S ZONING MAP FROM C-S-SP TO C-S-
SP-PD, AND SUBDIVIDE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING INTO EIGHT (8)
AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND A COMMON LOT, FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 735 TANK FARM ROAD.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt a resolution to subdivide a building into eight (8) air space commercial
condominium units and a common lot.
2. Introduce an ordinance approving a Negative Declaration of environmental impact and
amending the Zoning Map from C-S-SP, Service-Commercial with the Specific Plan
overlay zoning, to C-S-SP-PD, Service-Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings.
DISCUSSION
Data Summary
Address: 735 Tank Farm Road
Applicant: Edna Valley Office LLC
Exiting Zoning: C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay zoning
Proposed Zoning: C-S-SP-PD, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings
General Plan: Services and Manufacturing
Environmental status: On January 23, 2003, the Deputy Director of Community Development
approved a Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project(ER 182-02).
Situation
The rectangular shaped site contains 2.36 acres and is currently in the process of being developed
with a 56,000 square foot commercial building, parking areas and landscaping. The project
proposes to add the Planned Development (PD) overlay zoning to the site to enable large office
tenants and to establish a master list of uses for the site as allowed by both the General Plan and
Zoning Regulations(Attachment 3 —PD 182-02: Master List of Uses).
i
Council Agenda Report—PD/MS/ER 182-02
April 1,2003
Page 2
In 1987, the City Council adopted amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Regulations that
allowed some large offices in the C-S and M zones with the approval of a.Planned Development
rezoning. The enabling ordinance was adopted because the existing office zones did not provide
adequate room to accommodate the number of large (over 2,500 square feet) offices expected to
need space within the City(Office Supply and Demand Study,Quad Engineering, 1986).
In addition to the rezone, the project also proposes to subdivide the building into eight (8) air
space commercial condominium units and a common lot to include the exterior building shell,
parking areas, landscaping, and other site improvements. No exceptions to the City's Subdivision
Regulations are being requested.
Planning Commission Action
On February 12, 2003, the Planning Commission voted six to zero (Commissioner Caruso
absent) to recommend that the City Council approve the Negative Declaration, subdivision of a
56,000 square foot building into eight (8) air space commercial condominium units and a
common lot, and amend the Zoning Map designation from C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the
Specific Plan overlay zoning, to C-S-SP-PD, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and
Planned Development overlay zonings, based on finding and subject to conditions (Attachment
4). Discussion was brief and focused on the list of allowed uses proposed by the applicant. The
applicant was in agreement with all of the staff recommended conditions of approval. The
Planning Commission staff report and hearing minutes are attached (Attachments 5 & 6).
Findings for Large Office Planned Developments
Municipal Code Section 17.62.040 C. allowing large professional offices to be established
through the PD overlay was added to the Planned Development zone section of the zoning
regulations in 1987. It is highlighted as a separate section with its own unique findings. This
differentiates the use of the PD to establish large offices from the traditional application of the
PD zone which is to grant exceptions to different development standards; to protect resources
and to encourage creative designs.
The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the PD for this project made all of the
required five findings outlined in the code, as well as two additional findings dealing with the
appropriateness of government offices at the site and the environmental determination. In
general, required findings cite: consistency with the General Plan; compatibility of proposed
offices with other nearby uses, including residences; non-interference of proposed offices with
established light manufacturing uses in the area; and not creating a shortage of land zoned for
light industrial uses.
r�
Council Agenda Report—PD/MS/ER 182-02
April 1,2003
Page 3
CONCURRENCES
The project was reviewed by various City departments and other interested agencies such as the
Airport Land Use Commission and utility companies. Comments received have been
incorporated as conditions of approval and code requirements as appropriate.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which
found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan,it has a neutral fiscal impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the zoning map amendment and air space commercial subdivision, based on
inconsistency with the General Plan or other policy documents.
2. Continue action, if additional information is needed. Direction should be given to staff.
3. Approve the Planned Development with a different list of allowed and allowable uses, so
long as they are consistent with the General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Reduced Scale Site Plan
3. PD 182-02: Master List of Uses
4. Planning Commission Resolution 5358-03
5. Planning Commission staff report
6. Planning Commission minutes
7. Initial Study of Environmental Impact
8. Draft Resolution "A" as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff
9. Draft PD Ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff
10. Alternative Draft Resolution `B" to deny the proposed project
GAtcorey\CC\PD-MS-ER 182-02\PD-MS-ER 182-02 tpt.doc
4r3
• � r i�+,t i��t
■ ■.....■ ��< ��'
_ Attachment 2
..�.
-----------------------
r -------------
O \ -----�� TANK FP
--------------
L%--y
N \ •�, f fl ��, � I _.IWLL__ rn7nj
;E jig
o \ alyy♦-♦ I Y
JJLJ_I_1�_�-•] , -���
'Q Ip _�ipmYYt 1 I r 1 1
Oinl '�('^�♦ I 1 I I �-- -r a,i
I
Cav
r,-fi
111
s� 1--� 1 ��� ��a •�,;``,- 1111
L_ I`
pa 1 t
r ^�... may/ _• 4-� S<- _Ir J1 '
C
O
H L^o K'^
^rte• I ; I 11 L_' p --'JII
II II ' I r_r r Cn
O — fi9vJs'
f 1 qf] r
I
U yJ 1 1 LJ 11 I I V --i'
PO
A ulml _ 1 ` i §ig- ll
8
- - }___T 1 I �/�/r��'/���•` 1 1 I �1 () I I 1 1 1 (I
, ` , \I 1 1 44
I-n nr'.'Ir.'� �1.Ll J_}� aJ•_L J_LJ L1J_LJ_L.,1 `-L
'=at_alr-rrvrl-r,r�-rrrr�rr-rr -r�� 11
iei e$$ II 1 1,'/
JI
z
gig
�'`1>b�{yZpx- y.i-1 1 11 I
\ L1 J_lal-L�aJ•_LJ_L�LJ_L_ -- ---
1
A�bti --------------
to
QA m m
x11
a a r Q� € o
99 a
Amo C s
2 o
°
q
.V}C}Y\YMI��� •I�}'P} NPA 111
Attachment 3
PD 182-02: Master List of Uses
Type of Use Under Applicant's PC & Staff
current C-S Proposal Recommenda-
Zone tion
Advertising and related services A A A
Antennas—municipal,
commercial,and public utility D9 D D9
broadcasting and wireless
communications
Athletic and health clubs, A D' D
fitness centers,game courts,
and other recreational facilities
-indoor
Audio and Video Production Not Listed A A
Studios
Banks,savings&loan
-Branch of bank, savings& DZ D' D1.2
loan or credit union(2,000 sf
GF each)
Barbers,hairstylists, D D' D'
manicurists,tanning centers
Broadcast studios A A D
Building and landscape A PC W
maintenance services
Child or elderly care, each D D' D''3
facility having up to 5,000 sf
gross floor area
Computer services A A° A°
Construction Activities A A A
(Section 17.08.010.C5)
Credit reporting and collection A A A
Delivery and courier services A D D
Detective and security services A D D
Government agency offices and -- D'•5 D"5
meeting rooms.
Insurance services(local) __ D5 Ds
Insurance services(regional) -- D5 D5
Laboratories for medical or A A A
analytical research
Offices—all types of general A A A
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Pemtit
=Use Not Allowed
� r�
Attachment 3
Type of Use Under Applicant PC & Staff
current C-S proposal Recommenda=
Page 2 Zone PD 182-02 tion
and special building
contractor's offices
Offices-architecture, A A A
engineering,industrial design
Offices(professional) (Min. SF A6 A6
counselors,accountants, requirement of
investment brokers,appraisers 2,500 s.f)6
Organizations(professional,
religious,political,labor, D D D3
fraternal,trade,youth,etc.)
offices and meeting rooms
Photocopy services and quick A A A
printers _
Photo finishing-retail A D' D'
Photo finishing-wholesale;
blue-printing and microfilming A A A
service
Photographic studios A A A
Post offices and public and A A A
private postal services
Printing and publishing A A A
Public assembly facilities
(community meeting rooms, PC PC BCs
auditorium,convention halls)
Repair services—office and A D D
business only
Research&development—
services,software,consumer A A A
products,instruments,office
equipment,and similar items
Restaurants,sandwich shops, D D' D'
take-out food,etc.
Combined floor area not to
exceed 25%of total floor area
and 2,000 s f. max.floor area
per use
Retail sales—convenience D D' D'
stores
Combined floor area not to
exceed 25%of total floor area
and 2,000 sf.max.floor area
per use
Retail sales—business and A D' D''
office equipment supplies
(5,000 sf GFA each)
Retail sales and repair of A D' D'''
bicycles(2,000 sf GFA each)
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Permit
-- =Use Not Allowed Y
T
Attachment 3
Type of Use Under Applicant PC & Staff
current C-S proposal Recommenda-
Page 3 Zone PD 182-02 tion
Secretarial and related services
such as transcribing,telephone D D D
answering
Ticket/travel agencies D D D
Title companies __ D5 D5,10
Utility company—Engineering D D D
and administration offices
Wholesale(excluding fuel A D1 Dt's
dealer)and mail order
Notes:
1. The following uses are secondary uses within the project site;their combined floor area shall not exceed 25
percent of the total floor area. Some are also subject to limits on individual floor area.
➢ Ambulance service
➢ Athletic and health clubs
➢ Bicycle repair(max.2,000 square feet of floor area)
➢ Branch of bank,savings&loan,credit union,finance company(2,000 square feet per use)
➢ Photo finishing—retail
➢ Retail sales of food,publications,sundries(2,000 square feet of floor area per use)
➢ Sale,rental of business office supplies(5,000 square feet of floor area peruse)
➢ Wholesaling,mail order(as freestanding uses)
2. In the C-S zone,only branches of banks are allowed—no headquarters.
3. Use requires specific approval by the Airport Land Use Commission(may be incompatible with ALUP Area 5).
4. Computer services limited to data processing and technical support.
5. Allowable with administrative use permit with documentation of limited public visitation and determination of
consistency with City's tri-polar policy and with public facility and office location policies(General Plan).
6. Zoning Regulations allow large offices(min.2;500 sf floor area per tenant)with PD Overlay. Non-branch
banking services,real estate offices,financial institutions,medical clinics,doctor's offices and lawyer's offices
are prohibited.
7. Outdoor storage is not appropriate in this location.
8. Auto sales in areas other than Auto Park Way should be minimized according to the General Plan Land Use
Element.
9. Allowed subject to compliance with development standards stipulated in Section 17.16.120 of the Zoning
Regulations.
10. Title companies must maintain a customer service office elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning where
there is no restriction on customer visitations.
Shaded cells indicate that the Planning Commission.and staff recommendation are different than
the applicant's request
Italics note use descriptions not currently included in the Zoning Regulations. Some were
suggested by the applicant, some by staff.
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Permit
=Use Not Allowed
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION NO.5358-03 — ---
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING, VESTING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 735 TANK FARM ROAD
PD/MS/ER 182-02
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
February 12, 2003 for the purpose of considering application PD/MS/ER 182-02, a request to
amend the City's zoning map designation from Service Commercial with the Specific Plan
overlay zoning (C-S-SP), to Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings (C-S-SP-PD), and subdivide an existing commercial building into
eight(8) air space commercial condominium lots; and
WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding
recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Negative
Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the
testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Planned Development Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the
Commission makes the following findings in support of Planned Development zoning for the
project site:
1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area because PD
zoning surrounds the project site and the approved list of uses is consistent with the Airport
Land Use Plan and General Plan.
2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or
collector streets in residential zones because the project is generally located on the corner of
Broad Street and Tank Farm Road in a developing commercial and industrial area with direct
access off Tank Farm Road away from residential streets.
3. The project does not preclude industrial or service commercial uses in areas especially suited
for such use when compared with offices.
r9
Planning Commission Resolution#5358-03 Attachment 4
PD/MS/ER 182-02
Page 2
4. The PD rezoning to allow large offices and other uses consistent with the General Plan at the
site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise, light and glare, and loss of privacy,
among others, imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas.
5. The project does not create a shortage of C-S and M zoned land available for service
commercial or industrial development. The project will not result in a loss of C-S or M
zoned land.
6. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on
government office locations and the desirability for convenience services primarily serving
area workers.
7. A negative declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on
January 23, 2003. The negative declaration concludes that the project will not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment.
Section 2. Subdivision Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes
the following findings in support of the air space commercial subdivision at the project site:
1. The design of the air space commercial subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and
Edna-Islay Specific Plan, which allow division of land in accordance with the City's
subdivision regulations.
2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the C-S zone
in that it has already been developed with a commercial building and the proposed airspace
subdivision will simply allow for individual ownership.
3. The design of the vesting tentative parcel map and the proposed improvements are not likely
to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any creeks
or other potentially significant habitat areas for fish and wildlife and the site has already been
developed with a commercial building, parking areas and landscaping.
4. The design of the air space subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the
proposed subdivision because an existing common driveway easement on Tank Farm Road
will remain unaffected by the proposed subdivision.
Section 3. Environmental Review. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend
adoption of the proposed Negative Declaration.
Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council approval of application PD/MS/ER 182-02, subject to the following conditions and
code requirements.
.C..{ r
Planning Commission Resolution #5358-03 Attachment 4
PD/MS/ER 182-02
Page 3
Conditions:
1. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in the
zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply.
2. Allowed and conditionally allowed uses shall be as specified in the staff recommendation
column in the attached table (PD 182-02: Comparison of Uses, attachment 3). Uses that are
not listed may not be established at the site.
3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single professional
office tenant may occupy less than 2,500 square feet of adjacent, interconnected floor area, as
indicated in the list of allowed uses recommended by staff.
4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: non-branch banking services, real
estate offices, financial institutions, medical clinics, doctor's offices, and lawyer's offices.
5. Government agencies not functionally related to general government, social services, or
health care operations, as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1 may
be allowed at the site through the approval of an Administrative Use Permit with the
combined floor area of the use not to exceed 25% of the total floor area of the building and
documentation of limited public visitation. The Hearing Officer may refer these requests to
the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General Plan
consistency issues.
6. Title companies wishing to locate at the site shall maintain a customer service office, such as
an escrow office, elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories where there is
no restriction on customer visitations.
7. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking
calculations for the site upon the submittal of Planning and Building permits for tenant
changes or improvements to ensure the project site does not become under parked.
8. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional traffic
impact fees to be paid prior to final approval of the shell building or occupancy of the first
tenant space, whichever occurs first. A credit shall be given for those impact fees already
paid with the shell-building permit (based on a'C-S zone commercial/industrial building).
9. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto,
including but not limited to environmental review.
Code requirements:
1. The subdivider shall provide individual electrical, phone, television, natural gas, and water
service and related utility company meters to each unit to the approval of the affected utility
companies, Community Development Director, and the Public Works Director. The building
4r S
is
Planning Commission Resolution#5358-03 Attachment 4
PD/MS/ER 182-02
Page 4
permit plans shall be revised or a separate permit shall be issued to show separate services
and meters as required.
2. The subdivider shall submit a final map to the city for review, approval, and recordation.
The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor. The final map shall be prepared in accordance with the Subdivision
Map Act and the Subdivision Regulations.
3. The map shall be tied to at least two points of the City's horizontal control network, California
State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5 (1991.35 epoch adjustment of the North American
Datum of 1983 also referred to as "NAD 83" - meters) for direct import into the Geographic
Information System (GIS) database. Submit this data either via email, CD or a 3-1/2" floppy
'disc containing the appropriate data for use with AutoCAD, version 2000 or earlier (model
space in real world coordinates, NAD 83 - m). If you have any questions regarding format,
please call prior to submitting electronic data.
4. The final map shall use the International System of Units (metric system). The English
System of Units may be used on the final map where necessary (e.g. - all record data shall be
entered on the map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis), to the
approval of the City Engineer.
On motion by Commissioner Boswell, seconded by Commr Aiken, and on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commrs. Christianson, Aiken, Cooper, Boswell, Osborne and Loh
NOES: None
REFRAIN: None
ABSENT: Commr. Caruso
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12`h day of February 2003.
Ronald Whisenind, Secretary
Planning Commission by:
Pam Ricci, Acting Deputy Director
�C� t �"
Attachment 5
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
BY: Tyler Corey, Planning Technician (781-7169) DATE: February 12, 2003
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Deputy Director of Community Development
FILE NUMBER: PD/MS/ER 182-02
PROJECT ADDRESS: 735 Tank Farm
SUBJECT: Request to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-SP, Service
Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay zoning, to C-S-SP-PD, Service Commercial with the
Specific Plan and Planned Development overlay zonings, and subdivide an existing 56,000
square foot building into eight (8) air space commercial condominium lots and a common area,
for property located at 735 Tank Farm Road.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Recommend that the City Council approve the Planned Development rezoning, vesting tentative
parcel map and Negative Declaration, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval.
BACKGROUND
Situation
In August of 2000, the City's Architectural Review Commission approved the construction of a
56,000 square foot commercial building on a 2.36-acre site, which is nearing completion. This
building was reviewed under the assumption that it would be occupied by uses typically allowed
in the Service Commercial (C-S) zone. The applicant is proposing to add the Planned
Development (PD) overlay zoning to the site to expand the list of uses to include large office
tenants consistent with General Plan Policy and Zoning Regulation Standards.
The applicant also wishes to subdivide the existing building into eight (8) air space commercial
condominium units and a common lot to include the exterior building shell, parking areas,
landscaping, and other site improvements. No exceptions to the City's Subdivision Regulations are
being requested.
The Planning Commission reviews zoning amendments and subdivisions, and makes a
recommendation to the City Council, which takes a final action on such requests.
Data Summary
Address: 735 Tank Farm
Applicant: Edna Valley Office LLC
Exiting Zoning: C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay zoning
Proposed Zoning: C-S-SP-PD, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings
General Plan: Services and Manufacturing
Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration was recommended by the Deputy Director on
4" f3
Attachment 5
PD/MS/ER 182-02 (Edna :" ley Office LLC)
735 Tank Farm
Page 2
January 23, 2003 (ER 182-02). Final action on the initial study will be taken by the City
Council.
Site Description
The rectangular shaped site contains 2.36 acres and is currently in the process of being developed
with a 56,000 square foot commercial building, parking areas and landscaping. The property is
generally located on the southeast corner of Tank Farm Road and Broad Street, having frontage
off Tank Farm Road.
The surrounding area is a mix of residential, office and commercial uses. The property to the
west is zoned C-S-SP-PD and developed with a 9,000 square foot State Farm regional office
building. The property to the north across Tank Farm Road is zoned C-S-PD and developed with
the Marigold Shopping Center. The property to the east is zoned R-2-PD and developed with
residential condominiums and apartments. The property to the south is zoned R-2-SP-PD and
developed with single-family residences. Surrounding land uses are shown in Attachment 1.
Project Description
The project is a Planned Development (PD) rezoning to enable large office tenants, consistent
with Land Use Element policy 3.3.2 E, and a vesting tentative parcel map to subdivide an
existing 56,000 square foot commercial building into eight (8) air space commercial
condominium lots and a common area. The applicant also wishes to establish a list of uses
specific to this site consistent with the General Plan as allowed by Zoning Regulations Section
17.50.020.
EVALUATION
Rezoning Request and Consistency with the General Plan
The site is designated for "Services and Manufacturing" on the General Plan Land Use Element
(LUE) map. The LUE encourages a wide range of uses, including "business services,
wholesaling, building contractors, utility company yards, auto repair, printing, convenience
restaurants and other activities primarily serving area workers, food manufacturing and other
light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored
outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants)." LUE Section 3.5 contains the policies for the
Services and Manufacturing category. Policy 3.5.2 F., Appropriate Uses, allows for large
offices", with the proper approvals. This policy is also reiterated in the Offices Section,
specifically Policy 3.3.2 E. Therefore, the application for a Planned Development, PD, zoning to
allow certain large offices is consistent with these LUE policies.
The project site is currently zoned C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay
zoning and located within the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area. This specific plan provides a
comprehensive plan for land use, circulation, parks and open space, and utilities in the Edna-Islay
neighborhood. On September 21, 1993, the Enda-Islay Specific Plan Land Use Map was
amended from Neighborhood Commercial to Service Commercial for the project site. This
411x4
PD/MS/ER 182-02 (Edna . ..iley Office LLC) Attachment 5
735 Tank Farm
Page 3
corrected an inconsistency between the General Plan and Specific Plan, and allowed large
professional offices to locate at the site with approval of a PD rezoning. There are no special
restrictions imposed by the Specific Plan for commercial subdivisions beyond the City's standard
Subdivision Regulations.
The applicant has applied for the Planned Development overlay zoning at the site to enable the
establishment of large professional offices (defined as having a minimum floor area of 2,500
square feet). Zoning regulations implement LUE policy through Note 10 following Table 9 - Uses
Allowed by Zone which provides for establishing large offices in the C-S and M zones, subject to
PD zoning approval. Office uses typically characterized by substantial public visitation or need for
access to downtown government services, such as banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,
Medical and legal offices, are prohibited. Findings that the Planning Commission and City Council
must make in approving a PD zoning for large offices are listed below. The Commission and
Council must also find that uses allowed as part of a PD rezoning are consistent with the General
Plan (Section 17.50.020).
1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area.
2. The project's location or access arrangement does not significantly direct traffic to use
local or collector streets in residential areas.
3. The project will provide adequate mitigation to address potential impacts related to noise,
light and glare and loss of privacy, among others, imposed by commercial activities on
nearby residential areas, by using methods such as setbacks, landscaping, berming and
fencing.
4. The project does not preclude industrial or service commercial uses in areas especially
suited for such uses when compared with offices.
5. The project does not create a shortage of CS and M zoned land available for service
commercial or industrial development.
Recommendation: Staff believes the above findings can be made for the proposed list of uses for
the site and recommends that large professional office uses be allowed subject to a minimum floor
area requirement of 2,500 square feet per tenant space. Examples of professional office uses
include: Accountants; investment brokers; counselors; and appraisers. The following office related
uses are prohibited in the PD for the zone: Non-branch banking services, real estate offices,
financial institutions,medical clinics,doctor's offices, and lawyer's offices.
The Tri-Polar Concent
The applicant is requesting that government offices which can be found consistent with general
plan policies and the tri-polar concept be allowed subject to use permit approval with
documentation of limited public visitation. Government offices would be considered secondary
uses within the project site, having a total floor area not to exceed 25% of the total floor area of
the building.
Since the early 1980s, the City's Land Use Element (LUE) has contained policies which
encourage governmental offices to be congregated in certain physical areas of the City. The term
Lp t�
PD/MS/ER 182-02 (Edna ley Office LLC) Attachment 5
735 Tank Farm
Page 4
"tri-polar" evolved because the locations for government offices were to be located at three
different geographic areas or "poles". The three poles are Johnson Avenue near General
Hospital, the downtown civic center and the South Higuera area near Prado Road. Current
policies related to these_poles are now contained in the LUE Sections 3.3.2, Office Locations;
5.1, Public Facilities; and shown on the map in Figure 5.
LUE Policy 5.1.6 discusses the Social Services area and the desire for certain specified
governmental offices to be located here (County Social Services, California Employment
Development and Rehabilitation, Federal Social Security Administration). LUE Policy 5.1.7,
Related Offices, suggests that functionally related offices to those named above, should be
located in this area as well.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that government offices which can be found consistent
with general plan policies and the tri-polar concept be allowed subject to administrative use
permit approval and the total combined floor area of the use shall not exceed 25% of the total
floor area of the building.
Other Uses requested as part of the PD Rezoning
In addition to large offices, the applicant is requesting approval of several other uses normally
not allowed in the C-S zone but potentially allowable if determined to be consistent with the
General Plan. The Zoning Regulations, under Section 17.50.020 allow any use or combination
of uses which conform with the General Plan to be established on a site through the PD rezoning
process.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that certain uses which are not typically allowed in the C-
S zone be allowed or conditionally allowed because they are consistent with General Plan policy.
These uses include: Audio and video production studios (not currently listed in Table 9 of the
Zoning Regulations); insurance services, subject to administrative use permit approval with
documentation of limited public visitation; and title.companies, subject to administrative use
permit approval with documentation of limited public visitation, and maintenance of a customer
service office elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning where there is no restriction on
customer visitations.
Airport Land Use Plan
The project site is located in Zone 5 of the Airport Land Use Plan. This plan includes a matrix of
uses that is somewhat different than the current Zoning Regulations. In several cases, the staff
recommendations noted in the attached table, PD 182-02: Comparison of Uses, follow the
Airport Land Use Plan, and are also consistent with the General Plan. The following list of uses
require Airport Land Use Commission approval prior to the City's final land use determination:
1. Child or elderly care, each facility having up to 5,000 square feet of gross floor area
2. Organizations (professional, religious, political, labor, fraternal, trade youth, etc.) offices
and meeting rooms
1 Lo
Attachment 5
PD/MS/ER 182-02 (Edna,,..ley Office LLC)
735 Tank Farm
Page 5
3. Public assembly facilities (community meeting rooms, auditorium, convention halls)
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
The vesting tentative parcel map will result in the creation of eight (8) air space commercial
condominium lots and a common area that conform to zoning, General Plan, Subdivision, and all
other City regulations. The land division is also consistent with the Edna Islay Specific Plan.
To approve a subdivision the Planning Commission must find that it is consistent with the
General Plan and applicable specific plan. The Subdivision Map Act (Section 66474) also
includes findings for denial of a subdivision, which, reversed, may be used as findings for
approval. As mentioned above, the air space commercial subdivision is consistent with General
Plan policies and the Edna-Islay Specific Plan.
Utilities
The existing commercial building was constructed with a single service utility installation at the
site. Because the applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing building into eight (8) air space
commercial condominium lots with a common area, separate utilities are required for each
individual condominium unit per Section 16.36.2501 of the Municipal Code. A water system for
domestic service and fire protection is required to be provided to each condominium unit at the
street frontage or as approved by the city engineer. Electric power, gas and telephone services
will need to be stubbed to each condominium unit, and all facilities to distribute such services
shall be provided according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. Sewer
service can be provided through a common private system. Exceptions to the above standards
can be approved by the City Council pursuant to Section 16.48.010. However, the City has not
formally received a written exception request to this Municipal Code Section, therefore, no
analysis was conducted regarding such a proposal.
Parking, Access and Transportation
In the C-S zone, there are a range of allowed uses with various parking requirements. Some
office and retail uses have a requirement of 1:300 and some warehousing uses have a
requirement of 1:1;500. Commercial shell buildings are often developed with a parking ratio in
between, such as 1:500. Parking and access for the subject building was reviewed with the
project development plans through the architectural review process. The project was required to
provide 175 car parking spaces (at a rate of 1:300), 27 bicycle spaces (15% of total car spaces)
and 9 motorcycle spaces (one space for every 20 car spaces).
On August 18, 2000, a 10% shared parking reduction was approved for the site. Conditions of
approval for this reduction ensure all parking spaces are available for common use and not
exclusively assigned to any individual use, and in the event that one tenant occupies the entire
building, the 10% parking reduction will be eliminated.
PD/MS/ER 182-02 (Edna C�iley Office LLC) --
Attachment 5
735 Tank Farm
Page 6
On October 18, 2001, building plans were submitted for the project that shows a parking
equivalent of 175 car spaces (151 actual spaces, plus 18 credit spaces for the shared parking
reduction and 6 credit spaces for additional bicycle parking). Assuming that the entire building is
occupied by uses that are required to be parked at a ratio 'of 1:300 (typical for most office uses),
the project site could effectively accommodate its parking requirement. It should be noted that
the above estimate of required parking for the building is based on a rational projection of
potential uses of the building's space. However, given the range of uses proposed with the PD
zoning, there may be potential future tenants with higher parking demands that would not be
appropriate here. To ensure the project does not become under-parked, a condition has been
added that ties responsibility to the property owners for providing a running total of the site's
parking requirements with the submittal of any building permit for tenant improvements.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project was routed to various City departments and other interested agencies such as the
Airport Land Use. Commission and utility companies. Comments received have been
incorporated as conditions of approval where appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend that the City Council approve
an amendment to the City's zoning map designation from C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the
Specific Plan overlay zoning, to C-S-SP-PD, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and
Planned Development overlay zonings, and the subdivision of an existing commercial building
into eight (8) air space commercial condominium lots, based on findings included in the attached
Planning Commission Resolution (attachment 5).
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Planning Commission may recommend denial of the Planned Development rezone
and commercial condominium subdivision, based on findings that modifications would
be inconsistent with the Subdivision Map Act, General Plan and/or other policy
documents.
2. The Planning Commission may continue action, if additional information is needed.
Direction should be given to staff.
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
3. Table: PD 182-02. Comparison of Uses
4. Initial Study(ER 182-02)
5. Planning Commission Resolution
1
Attachment 6
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 12, 2002
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, February 12, 2003, in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Michael Boswell, Jim Aiken, Orval Osborne, Allan Cooper,
Carlyn Christianson, and Chairwoman Alice Loh.
Absent: Commissioner James Caruso.
Staff: Associate Planner Michael Codron, Deputy Community Development
Director Ronald Whisenand, City Attorney Gil Trujillo, and Recording
Secretary Irene Pierce.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA
Staff recommended that Item 4 on the agenda be continued to March 12, 2003, without
discussion. The agenda was accepted as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
MaryBeth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, felt that too many things in the City are being
changed without merit.
There were no further comments made from the public.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 735 Tank Farm Road. PD, MS and ER 182-02; Request to create a master list of
uses for a new building within a PD overlay zone; subdivision of an existing building
into 8 commercial condominium units, and environmental review; C-S-SP zone;
Edna Valley Office, LLC, applicant. (Tyler Corey)
Associate Planner Michael Codron presented the staff report recommending that the
City Council approve the planned development rezoning, vesting tentative parcel map
and Negative Declaration, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval as
noted in the staff report.
Commr. Cooper asked if the tri-polar concept relates to health care facilities in this part
of town.
Draft PC Minutes Attachment 6
Excerpt Item 1
Page 2
Deputy Director Whisenand replied yes, but noted there is a general government office
component that is tied to this and other office policies in the General Plan, but there are
some exceptions that allow for government offices.
Chairwoman Loh questioned how the six bicycle parking spaces would be calculated
and asked how many there actually are.
Planner Codron explained that 27 bicycle parking spaces are broken up between long-
term and short-term spaces. The Zoning Regulations allow for additional parking
spaces to offset a vehicle parking requirement.
Deputy Director Whisenand noted that they were able to meet their parking demand
with 151 spaces, which was in compliance with what the code requires.
Commr. Boswell questioned if this project is going in the same direction as the
commercial zoning changes on the issue of allowing larger offices in this type of area.
Deputy Director Whisenand replied yes, and explained they will be looking at the
commercial zoning update differently, and noted the only way to get large professional
offices in the C=S zone is through a PD zoning.
Chairwoman Loh asked if fire sprinkler systems are required, noting it is not mentioned
anywhere.
Planner Codron replied the building is being developed with a fire sprinkler system,
which is a code requirement.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
John Shoals, EDA, noted that this project is similar to what was approved for the
Cannon Corporate Center at Tank Farm Road and Broad Street, and that the applicant
is trying to be consistent with the neighborhood. He explained that this list would allow
the Commission and Council to expand the uses for those uses that are not addressed
in the General Plan but are consistent with the intent. He noted it also allows large
offices of 2500 square feet to help meet the growing demand for office space in the city.
Commr. Cooper asked if they objected to not having outdoor storage.
Mr. Shoals replied they have no problem with that.
Chairwoman Loh asked if the ARC reviewed this project.
Deputy Director Whisenand replied yes, and explained the project is in full compliance
with the City's land use regulations and no exceptions are requested..
Chairwoman Loh expressed concern with the Landscaping area, and noted the outdoor
common space is not only shared but also very narrow, which could be a safety issue.
`T'�
Draft PC Minutes
Attachment 6
Excerpt Item 1
Page 3
Mr. Shoals explained the applicant met with and received input from the homeowners to
the east, and the building was set back 75-feet to address their concerns. He noted he
had no problems with the staff recommendation.
There were no further comments made from the public.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Boswell noted there was a change to the code finding.
Deputy Director Whisenand responded it was a requirement of the subdivision map.
Planner Codron explained that code requirement 5 states the final map must be
recorded before the units are occupied or they would be considered a condominium
conversion. Because this is not a residential project, this does apply.
Commr. Boswell asked if it should be stricken.
Planner Codron replied yes.
Commr. Boswell. moved to recommend that the City .Council approve the planned
development rezoning, vesting tentative parcel map and negative declaration, based on
findings and subject to conditions of approval, and deleting code requirement #5.
Seconded by Commr. Aiken.
Commr. Cooper commented on uses such as appliances, furniture and furnishings,
which would have substantial public visitation.
Deputy Director Whisenand replied they do not envision this office project being retail..
AYES: Commrs. Boswell, Aiken, Osborne, Cooper, Christianson, and Loh.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commr. Caruso.
ABSTAIN: None.
The motion carried 6-0.
Ifia6--South Hi uera Street #200. A 179-02: Appeal of the Community
Deve irector's interpretation of Chapter 17.22 requiring a use permit for a
personal services s (Weight Watchers) in the C-S zone; Weight Watchers,
applicant/appellant.
Associate Planner Michael Codron presented staff rep mending denial of the
appeal and upholding the Director's determination, and directing ant back to
the Administrative Use Permit process, based on findings as noted in the sta r
��011A
Attachment 7
°IIII
city of SAn IUIS'
OBISPO
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER 182-02
1. Project Title: Edna Valley Office Commercial PD & Air Space Subdivision
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:.
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Tyler Corey, Planning Technician (805) 781-7169
4. Project Location: 735 Tank Farm Road
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Edna Valley Office LLC
735 Tank Farm Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Michael Hodge as representative for the applicant
6. General Plan Designation: Services & Manufacturing
7. Zoning: C-S-SP, Service Commercial with the Specific Plan overlay zoning
8. Description of the Project:
The project proposes to add the Planned Development overlay zoning to the site to enable large
office tenants, consistent with Land Use Element policy 3.3.2 E, which states that large offices,
with no single tenant spaces less than 2,500 square feet, and having no substantial public
visitation or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and
Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development (PD) zoning application.
The applicant also wishes to establish a list of uses specific to this site consistent with the
General Plan as allowed by Zoning Regulations Section 17.50.020. Additionally, the applicant is
proposing to subdivide an existing 56,000 square foot commercial building into eight (8) air
space commercial condominium lots and a common area.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The 2.36 acre site contains a nearly completed 56,000
square foot commercial building, parking areas and landscaping. The property is located within
�� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. ^
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 4.—4-a-
Attachment 7
the Edna-Islay Specific Plan area has frontage on Tank Farm Road. The surrounding area is mix
of residential, office and commercial uses.
10. Project Entitlements Requested:
Tentative Parcel Map
PD Rezoning
Environmental Review
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None
Cmr OF SAN Luis OBIsPO 2 INITIAL STuOY ENVIRONMENTAL C•HEcKLisT.2001
q-a3
,. Attachment 7
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.
Aesthetics Geology/Soils Public Services
Agricultural Resources Hazards&Hazardous Recreation
Materials
Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Transportation&Traffic
Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service
Systems
Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Energy and Mineral Population and Housing
Resources
FISH AND GAME FEES
There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish
X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As.such, the project qualifies for a
de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees.
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish
and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
The project requires review by one or more State agencies such as Cal Trans or the California Department
of Fish and Game and is to be sent to the State Clearinghouse for routing.
�� CRY OF SAN Luis Osispo 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEcKusT 2001 J
Attachment 7
DETERMINATION:
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. X
I rind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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 "potentially significant' impact(s) or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact(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. 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,
because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions
or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
January 23,2003
ature Date
Ron Whisenand,Deputy Community Development Director Community Development Director
Printed Name for
C(rY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECIOJST 2001
Attachment 7
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 analysis in each section. 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. The explanation of each
issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold,if any, used to evaluate each question.
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) of the California
Administrators Code. 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.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
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 earlier analysis.
C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent
to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
CRY OF SAN LUIS Oetseo 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKUS/T(2-00�1,
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supportli,y .,[formation Sources Sources Poto.__. J Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER # 182-02 Edna Valle Office Commercial PD
Issues unless trnpae'
Valley Mitigation
Incorporated
1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited
to,trees,rock outcroppings,open space,and historic buildings X
within a local or state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of X
the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would X
adversely effect day of nighttime views in the area?
Conclusion: No impact. The proposed air space commercial subdivision and PD rezoning will allow for a wider range of
uses,but will have no impact to the physical appearance of the site.
2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of
Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps X
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a X
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to
their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland, X
to non-agricultural use?
Conclusion: No impacts to agricultural resources would occur with the air space commercial subdivision or PD rezoning of
the site.
3. AIR QUALITY. Would theproject:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 1,3 X
existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X
quality plan?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X
concentrations?
d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X
people?
e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria X
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative
thresholds for ozoneprecursors)?
Conclusion: No impact. Approval of the PD zoning will allow for the expansion of the types, but not necessarily affect the
proportion,of office uses allowed because existing zoning already allows construction,architecture,and engineering offices with
no limit on the leasable area which these uses could occupy. No increase in trip generation is expected as a result of these
changes.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or indirectly or 1,2,6 X
through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a
candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional
plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect,on any riparian habitat or X
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 210`01
`4,
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and SUppom,i, .nformation Sources Sources Pot... J Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valle Office Commercial PD Issues unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X
biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance(e.g.Heritage Trees)?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident X
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation X
Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved
local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan?
f) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected X
wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including,but not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,etc.)
through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or
other means.
Conclusion: No impact. The project site is already developed with a commercial building,parking areas and landscaping.
5.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 15 X
historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X
archeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource X
or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of X
formal cemeteries?
Conclusion:No impact. The project site is already developed with a commercial building,parking areas and landscaping.
6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 1,6 X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient X
manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource X
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
State?
Conclusion: No impact. The proposed project's type and scale do not depend on the use of large amounts of energy.There
are no known mineral resources that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would theproject:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 1,5 X
effects,including risk of loss,injury or death involving:
I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated in the X
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area,or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
IL Strong seismic ground shaking? 1 X
M. Seismic related ground-failure,including liquefaction? X
IV. Landslides or mudflows? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that X
CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 208011
`—f" '
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Support,., .,Iformation Sources Sources Poi Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valley Office Commercial PD Issues Mittiless Impact
gation
Incorporated
would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially
result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading,subsidence,
liquefaction,or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the X
Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life
or ro ?
Conclusion: Less than significant. The project site is generally flat and is already developed with the commercial building,
parking lot areas and landscaping. There are no known fault lines on the project site or in the immediate vicinity. However,
the City of San Luis Obispo is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California and strong ground shaking should
be expected during a laze seismic event.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the Pro'ect:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 1,5 X
though the routine use,transport or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment X
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely X
hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous X
emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances,or waste?
e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous X
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and,as a result,it would create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
f) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within X
two miles of a public airport,would the project result in a safety
hazard for the people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of,or physically interfere with,the X
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose,injury, X
or death,involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed
with wildlands?
Conclusion: No impact. Uses allowed by the PD zoning will not increase the potential for hazardous conditions to be
present at the site. The project is within Zone 5 of the Airport Land Use Plan. However,all existing and proposed uses have
been determined to be compatible with the adopted land use plan.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the ro'ect:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 1,6 X
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be
a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level(eg.The production rate of preexisting
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X
Crry OF Snri Luts Oetspo 8 INma.STuOy ENviRoNmENTAL CHECKUST 2001
tAA
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supporth,y .aformation Sources Sources Pott, Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valley Office Commercial PD Mitigation
Incorporated
capacity of existing or planned storm-water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X
area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation onsite or offsite?
e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X
area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding
onsite or offsite?
f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on X
a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which X
would impede or redirect flood flows?
h Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
Conclusion: No impact. The proposed air space commercial subdivision and PD rezoning will not create water or drainage
impacts.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the reject:
a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 1,2,6 X
an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
b) Physically divide an established community? X
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X
community conservationplans?
The site is designated for "Services and Manufacturing" on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map. The LUE
encourages a wide range of uses, including "business services, wholesaling, building contractors, utility company yards, auto
repair, printing, food manufacturing and other light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items
often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants)." The LUE also mentions "convenience restaurants and other
activities primarily serving area workers" as appropriate types of uses. LUE Section 3.5.2 F allows for large offices with the
proper approvals.
Zoning regulations implement LUE policy through Note 10 following Table 9 - Uses Allowed by Zone which provides for
establishing large offices in the C-S and M zones, subject to PD zoning approval. Office uses typically characterized by
substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services, such as banks, real estate offices, financial
institutions, medical and legal offices, are prohibited. The Zoning Regulations, under Section 17.50.020 allows any use or
combination of uses which conform with the general plan to be established on a site through the PD rezoning process.
The project site is currently zoned C-S-SP,Service Commercial with the Specific Plan Overlay zoning and located within the
Edna-Islay Specific Plan area. This specific plan provides a comprehensive plan for land use, circulation, parks and open
space, and utilities in the Enda-Islay neighborhood. The proposed air space commercial subdivision and PD rezoning are in
compliance with the provisions of this plan.
The list of uses which the applicant has requested as part of the PD rezoning application will be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and City Council. Findings which the Planning Commission and City Council must make in approving a PD zoning
for large offices are outlined in zoning regulations Section 17.62.040 C. The Commission and Council must also find that uses
allowed as pan of a PD rezoning are consistent with the General Plan(Section 17.50.020).
Conclusion: The applicant's processing of the PD rezoning is the appropriate way to request large offices and other uses
consistent with the general plan at this site.
11.NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise 1,5,6 X
levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise
CITY OF SAN LUIS Owspo 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Support..., ..iformation Sources Sources Po. Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valle Office Commercial PD
Issues unless Impact
Valley Mitigation
Incorporated
Element,or general noise levels in excess of standards
established in the Noise Ordinance?
b) A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne X
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within X
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Conclusion: No impact. Office uses are generally quieter than many service and light industrial types of uses allowed in the
C-S zone. Therefore, the establishment of additional office uses may actually have a positive impact on ambient noise
conditions at the site. Likewise, the surrounding area does not contain any unusual noise generating uses that could provide
conflicts for office tenants.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 1 X
(for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people X
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Conclusion: No Impact. With approval of the PD rezoning, some large-scale offices could be established at the site. It is not
anticipated that potentially allocating more space within the building to a wider range of office uses would directly affect the
supply of City-wide housing. The PD may result in increased numbers of people working in some of the proposed tenant
spaces. However, assuming an increased number of employees is speculative since certain types of office uses are already
allowed by right with the underlying zoning. Therefore,any increase in anticipated employees and customers at the site is not
a laze enough number to significantly increase population levels or create a demand for new housing.
13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? 5,6 X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? X
f) Other public facilities? X
Conclusion: No impact. The proposed PD rezoning and air space commercial subdivision will not impact public services
and programs.
14.RECREATION. Would theproject:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 1,6 X
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or X
expansion of recreational facilities,which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
F
onclusion: No impact. The proposed PD rezoning and air space commercial subdivision will not impact recreational
acilities and programs.
ii CRY OF SAN Luis 091sP0 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001
4 r dA
Atfiachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Supportil,, .,[formation Sources Sources Pote, Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valley Office Commercial PD Mitigation
Incorporated
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would theproject:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 1,6 X
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system?
b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of service X
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads and highways?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features(e.g.sharp X
curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.
farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? X
f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative X
transportation(e.g. bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?
g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land X
Use Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards,noise,
or a change in air trafficpatterns?
Conclusion: Less than significant. Approval of the PD zoning will allow for the expansion of the types, but not necessarily
affect the proportion, of office uses allowed because existing zoning already allows construction, architecture, and engineering
offices with no limit on the leasable area which these uses could occupy. In addition, research and development uses, which
typically are organized in an"office style"arrangement are logical uses of the building and are currently allowed without the need
for PD zoning. Therefore,earlier mitigation that was adopted with project development plans will adequately address traffic and
circulation impacts.
16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the ro'ect:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 1,5,6 X
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water X
treatment,wasterwater treatment,or storm drainage facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project X
from existing entitlements and resources,or are new and
expanded water resources needed?
d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider X
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand and addition to
the provider's existing commitment?
e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
f) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations X
related to solid waste?
Conclusion: No impact. Currently, a 56,000 square foot commercial building is nearing completion with a single service
utility installation at the site. Because the applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing building into eight (8) air space
commercial condominium lots with a common area, separate utilities are required for each individual condominium unit per
Section 16.36.2507 of the Municipal Code. A water system for domestic service and fire protection is required to be provided
to each condominium unit at the street frontage or as approved by the city engineer. Electric power, gas and telephone
services will need to be stubbed to each condominium unit, and all facilities to distribute such services shall be provided
according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. Exceptions to the above standards can be approved by the
Cit Councilpursuant to Section 16.48.010.
17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the X
Crry OF SAN Luis OBiSPo INITIAL STuoy ENVIRONMENTAL CtiECKUST 2001
q- 32-
Attachment 7
Issues, Discussion and Suppon,..5 .nformation Sources Sources Po, I Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER# 182-02 Edna Valley Office Commercial PD Mitigation
Incorporated
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?
The current application for air space commercial condominiums and PD rezoning to allow some of the tenants to be large
professional office uses does not raise any issues related to environmental impacts since existing zoning allows construction,
architecture, and engineering offices with no limit on the leasable area which these uses could occupy. Approval of the PD
rezoning would simply expand the types,but not necessarily affect the proportion,of office uses allowed.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but X
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 roiects)
No cumulative impacts are expected to occur from the PD rezoning and airs ace commercial condominiums.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause X
substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or
indirectly?
No adverse effects on human being are anticipated with the PD rezonin and airs ace commercial condominiums.
18.EARLIER ANALYSES.Not Applicable
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.
No earlier analysis was used.
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.
No earlier analysis was used.
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.
No earlier analysis was used.
19. SOURCE REFERENCES
I. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan
2. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Ordinance,May 2,2002
3. 1998 Clean Air Plan,SLO APCD
4. San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan, 1979
5. San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
6. City of San Luis Obispo Edna-Islay Specific Plan, 1982
Attachment:
Tentative parcel map of the air space commercial condominiums and PD rezone site.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001
4- 33
Attachment 8
Draft Resolution "A"
RESOLUTION NO. (2003 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO APPROVING THE SUDIVISION OF A COMMERCIAL
BUILDING INTO EIGHT (8)AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND
A COMMON LOT,FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 735 TANK FARM
ROAD (MS 182-02).
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing on February 12, 2003, and recommended approval of the subdivision (MS 182-02)
to subdivide a commercial building into eight (8) air space condominium units and a common
lot, for property located at 735 Tank Farm Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on April 1, 2003 and has
considered testimony of 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 subdivision is consistent with the
General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Regulations, Edna-Islay Specific Plan and other applicable
City ordinances; and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following
findings in support of the air space commercial subdivision at the project site:
1. The design of the air space commercial subdivision is consistent with the General Plan
and Edna-Islay Specific Plan, which allow division of land in accordance with the City's
subdivision regulations.
2. The site is physically suited for the type and density of development allowed in the C-S
zone in that it has already been developed with a commercial building and the proposed
air space subdivision will simply allow for individual ownership.
3. The design of the vesting tentative parcel map and the proposed improvements are not
likely to cause serious health problems, substantial environmental damage or substantially
and unavoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site does not have any
creeks or other potentially significant habitat areas for fish and wildlife and the site has
already been developed with a commercial building, parking areas and landscaping.
4. The design of the air space subdivision, or the type of improvements, will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property
Attachment 8
Resolution No. (2003 Series)
Page 2
within the proposed subdivision because an existing common driveway easement on
Tank Farm Road will remain unaffected by the proposed subdivision.
SECTION 2. Action. The City Council does hereby approve application MS 182-02, as
shown in Exhibit A, subject to the following condition and code requirements.
Condition:
1. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend,
indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any
claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to
attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all
actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review.
Code Rewirements:
1. The subdivider shall provide individual electrical, phone, television, natural gas, and
water service and related utility company meters to each unit to the approval of the
affected utility companies, Community Development Director, and the Public Works
Director. The building permit plans shall be revised or a separate permit shall be issued
to show separate services and meters as required.
2. The subdivider shall submit a final map to the city for review, approval, and recordation.
The map shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor. The final map shall be prepared in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and the Subdivision Regulations.
3. The map shall be tied to at least two points of the City's horizontal control network,
California State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5 (1991.35 epoch adjustment of the
North American Datum of 1983 also referred to as "NAD 83" - meters) for direct import
into the Geographic.Information System (GIS) database. Submit this data either via email,
CD or a 3-1/2" floppy disc containing the appropriate data for use with AutoCAD, version
2000 or earlier (model space in real world coordinates, NAD 83 - m). If you have any
questions regarding format, please call prior to submitting electronic data.
4. The final map shall use the International System of Units (metric system). The English
System of Units may be used on the final map where necessary (e.g. - all record data shall
be entered on the map in the record units, metric translations should be in parenthesis), to
the approval of the City Engineer..
MACHMENTB-
Resolution No. (2003 Series)
Page 3_
On motion of , seconded by , and on the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15`day of April, 2003
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Gilbert A. Trujillo, Interim City Attorney
Attachment 8
-- - ---- - ---- Exhibit
---------------
TANK PI
_
r11 , r
Y J' {
CIJ-'-.i:"Q'_r.J111_I_1J_�..a�
p I LillmYrS 1 1HL.
it ♦�� )ll J t_ l lJ1
LlAj
IN �: ` I-I_ SII
Pr
rL
Lr
u LJ
20
I 1 1 I (Yer1 1,
�i n nr'. T •� �1_I_LJ_,LJ LJ_LJ L1J_LJ_L.J,
I n 1LJ �
p .€ 66.�J 1r—1 r1:r3 r, r'T T l rl rr r Ir
` LF4 5IT 2I I ',I I (1 I "I 1 I (1 I 1
-------------------
_ \\ /``Yp, �J__la.l_L���'_LJ_L�tJ_LJ_L�♦J_LJ_L Jl ;1 I
man IN
�gi gg� Pi A i I
31
lCe
if I NR CIO
It
N=:
m Q€ R a�
F ;i an Q ego
14
t) lb
C) rI
.y,p,Rplwq,R)r.w �/.f 0] i,RM1 (M
�! Attachment 9
Ordinance No. (2003 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM SERVICE
COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAY ZONING (C-S-
SP)TO SERVICE COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN AND
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONINGS (C-S-SP-PD),FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 735 TANK FARM ROAD (PD 182-02).
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing on February 12, 2003, and recommended approval of the rezoning (PD 182-02) to
change the designation on the City's zoning map from Service Commercial with the Specific
Plan overlay zoning (C-S-SP) to Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings (C-S-SP-PD), for property located at 735 Tank Farm Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on April 1, 2003, and has
considered testimony of 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 rezoning is consistent with the
General Plan 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; and
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 adequately addresses the potential significant environmental
impacts of the proposed rezoning, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council.
The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration.
SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following
findings in support of Planned Development zoning for the site:
1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area because PD
zoning surrounds the project site and the approved list of uses is consistent with the Airport
Land Use Plan and General Plan,
2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or
collector streets in residential zones because the project is generally located on the corner of
Broad Street and Tank Farm Road in a developing commercial and industrial area with direct
access off Tank Farm Road away from residential streets.
3. The project does not preclude industrial or service commercial uses in areas especially suited
for such use when compared with offices.
Attachment 9
Ordinance No. (2003 Series)
PD 182-02 (735 Tank Farm)
4. The PD rezoning to allow large offices and other uses consistent with the General Plan at the
site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise, light and glare, and loss of privacy,
among others, imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas.
5. The project does not create a shortage of C-S and M zoned land available for service
commercial or industrial development. The project will not result in a loss of C-S or M
zoned land.
6. As conditioned, the project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on
government office locations and the desirability for convenience services primarily serving
area workers.
7. A negative declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on
January 23, 2003. The negative declaration concludes that the project will not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council does hereby approve application PD 182-02, as
shown in Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions.
1. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in
the zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply.
2. Allowed and conditionally allowed uses shall be as specified in the master list of uses for
the site (Exhibit.B). Uses that are not listed may not be established at the site.
3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single
professional office tenant may occupy less than 2,500 square feet of adjacent,
interconnected floor area, as indicated in the list of allowed uses recommended by staff.
4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: non-branch banking services,
real estate offices, financial institutions, medical clinics, doctor's offices, and lawyer's
offices.
5. Government agencies not functionally related to general government, social services, or
health care operations, as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1
may be allowed at the site through the approval of an Administrative Use Permit with the
combined floor area of the use not to exceed 25% of the total floor area of the building
and documentation of limited public visitation. The Hearing Officer may refer these
requests to the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General
Plan consistency issues.
6. Title companies wishing to locate at the site shall maintain a customer service office,
such as an escrow office, elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories
a"
MACHM 9
Ordinance No. (2003 Series)
PD 182-02 (735 Tank Farm)
where there is no restriction on customer visitations.
7. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking
calculations for the site upon the submittal of Planning and Building permits for tenant
changes or improvements to ensure the project site does not become under parked.
8. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional
traffic impact fees to be paid prior to final approval of the shell building or occupancy of
the first tenant space, whichever occurs first. A credit shall be given for those impact
fees already paid with the shell-building permit (based on a C-S zone
commercial/industrial building).
SECTION 4. Adoption.
1. The zoning map is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A.
2. The Community Development Director shall cause the change to be reflected in
documents, which are on display in City Hall and are available for public viewing and
use.
SECTION 5. 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
Telegrame-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.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo at its meeting held on the 1st day of AAvril, 2003, on a motion of
seconded by and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTACHMEM
Ordinance No. (2003 Series)
PD 182-02 (735 Tank Farm)
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
4 '
4:IIerl Trujillo, Interim City Attorney
q -4l
iGMason
SII
■ ■..ns ��` ��
REZONING M
735 Tank Farm
Attachment 9
Exhibit B
PD 182-02: Master List of Uses
Type of Use Under Applicant's Staff
current C-S proposal Recommenda-
Zone tion
Advertising and related services A A A
Antennas—municipal,
commercial,and public utility D9 D D9
broadcasting and wireless
communications
Athletic and health clubs, A D' D
fitness centers,game courts,
and other recreational facilities
-indoor
Audio and Video Production Not Listed A A
Studios
Banks,savings&loan
-Branch of bank, savings& D2 Dt Dt.2
loan or credit union(2,000 sf
GF each)
Barbers,hairstylists, D D' D'
manicurists,tanning centers
Broadcast studios A A D
Building and landscape A PC PC
maintenance services
Child or elderly care, each D Dt D1,3
facility having up to 5,000 sf
gross floor area
Computer services A A4 A4
Construction Activities A A A
(Section 17.08.010.C5)
Credit reporting and collection A A A
Delivery and courier services A D D
Detective and security services A D D
Government agency offices and — Dt•5 D1.s
meeting rooms.
Insurance services(local) __ D5 Ds
Insurance services(regional) — D5 D5
Laboratories for medical or A A A
analytical research
Offices—all types of general A A A
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Permit
=Use Not Allowed
- _ Attachment 9
Type of Use _ Under Applicant b Staff
current C-S proposal Recommenda-
Page 2 Zone PD 182-02 bon
and special building
contractor's offices
Offices-architecture, A A A
engineering, industrial design
Offices(professional) (Min.SF A6 Ali
counselors,accountants, requirement of
investment brokers,appraisers 2,500 s.f.)6
Organizations(professional,
religious,political,labor, D D D3
fraternal,trade,youth,etc.)
offices and meeting rooms
Photocopy services and quick A A A
printers
Photo finishing-retail A Dt D'
Photo finishing-wholesale;
blue-printing and microfilming A A A
service
Photographic studios A A A
Post offices and public and A A A
private postal services
Printing and publishing A A A
Public assembly facilities
(community meeting rooms, PC Pca
auditorium,convention halls)
Repair services—office and A D D
business only
Research&development—
services,software,consumer A A A
products,instruments,office
equipment,and similar items
Restaurants,sandwich shops, D D' D1
take-out food,etc.
Combined floor area not to
exceed 25%of total floor area
and 1,000 s f. max.floor area
per use
Retail sales—convenience D D1 D�
stores
Combined floor area not to
exceed 25%of total floor area
and 2,000 sf.max.floor area
per use
Retail sales—business and A D' D'
office equipment supplies
(5,000 sf GFA each)
Retail sales and repair of A Dt D1''
bicycles(1,000 sf GFA each)
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Permit
=Use Not Allowed
q- 44
- Attachment 9
Type of Use Under Applicants Staff --
current C-S proposal Recommenda-
Page 3 Zone PD 182-02 tion
Secretarial and related services
such as transcribing,telephone D D D
answering
Ticket I travel agencies D D D
Title companies — D5 D5.10
Utility company—Engineering D D D
and administration offices
Wholesale(excluding fuel A D' DL,8
dealer)and mail order
Notes:
1. The following uses are secondary uses within the project site;their combined floor area shall not exceed 25
percent of the total floor area. Some are also subject to limits on individual floor area.
➢ Ambulance service
➢ Athletic and health clubs
➢ Bicycle repair(max.2,000 square feet of floor area)
➢ Branch of bank,savings&loan,credit union,finance company(2,000 square feet per use)
➢ Photo finishing—retail
➢ Retail sales of food,publications,sundries(2,000 square feet of floor area per use)
➢ Sale,rental of business office supplies(5,000 square feet of floor area per use)
➢ Wholesaling,mail order(as freestanding uses)
2. In the C-S zone,only branches of banks are allowed—no headquarters.
3. Use requires specific approval by the Airport Land Use Commission(may be incompatible with ALUP Area 5).
4. Computer services limited to data processing and technical support.
5. Allowable with administrative use permit with documentation of limited public visitation and determination of
consistency with City's tri-polar policy and with public facility and office location policies(General Plan).
6. Zoning Regulations allow large offices(min.2,500 sf floor area per tenant)with PD Overlay. Non-branch
banking services,real estate offices,financial institutions,medical clinics,doctor's offices and lawyer's offices
are prohibited.
7. Outdoor storage is not appropriate in this location.
8. Auto sales in areas other than Auto Park Way should be minimized according to the General Plan Land Use
Element.
9. Allowed subject to compliance with development standards stipulated in Section 17.16.120 of the Zoning
Regulations.
10. Title companies must maintain a customer service office elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning where
there is no restriction on customer visitations.
Shaded cells indicate that the staff recommendation is different than the applicant's request.
Italics note use descriptions not currently included in the Zoning Regulations. Some were
suggested by the applicant, some by staff.
Zoning Regulations
A =Allowed use
D =Allowable with Administrative Use Permit
PC=Allowable with Planning Commission Use Permit
=Use Not Allowed /
+ '-t C
Attachment 10
Draft Resolution `B"
RESOLUTION NO. (2003 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S ZONING MAP
FROM C-S-SP TO C-S-SP-PD,AND SUBDIVISION OF A COMMERCIAL
BUILDING INTO EIGHT (8)AIR SPACE CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND
A COMMON LOT,FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 735 TANK.FARM
ROAD (PD/14S 182-02).
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing on February 12, 2003, and recommended approval of the rezoning (PD 182-02) to
change the designation of the City's zonin&rnap from Service Commercial with the Specific Plan
overlay zoning (C-S-SP) to Service Commercial with the Specific Plan and Planned
Development overlay zonings (C-S-SP-PD), and subdivision (MS 182-02) to subdivide a
commercial building into eight (8) air space condominium units and a common lot, for property
located at 735 Tank Farm Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on April 1, 2003 and has
considered testimony of 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 rezoning and subdivision is
inconsistent with the General Plan and other applicable City ordinances; and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following
findings for denial of the rezoning and air space commercial subdivision at the project site:
1. The project is inconsistent with the General Plan because [Council to specify reasons].
SECTION 2. Action. The rezoning request from C-S-SP to C-S-SP-PD and commercial
subdivision for property at 735 Tank.Farm Road is hereby denied.
On motion of seconded by , and on the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
� � 4(Q
AT1 ACHMEW 10
Resolution No. (2003 Series)
Page 2
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 151 day of April, 2003.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPR7ED AS TO FORM:
i
Gilbert A. Trujillo, Interim City Attorney
4, 4"-7