Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2004, PH6 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO TOURIST COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERT counat j ac En as REpoRt fo luem Ni�v CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Directo gor-)61� Prepared By: Phil Dunsmore, Associate Planner SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO TOURIST COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1661 MILL STREET (GP/R/ER 37-04). CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt Draft Resolution "A", conceptually approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and amendment to the City's Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map designations from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Tourist Commercial (C-T-S), which directs staff to return the project to the Council at the July 6, 2004, regular meeting, to formally adopt a resolution and ordinance for the project. DISCUSSION Data Summary Address: 1661 Mill Street Applicant: American Legion Post 66 Representative: Matt Wall Zoning: R-2 (Medium Density Residential) General Plan: Tourist Commercial Environmental Status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was recommended by the Planning Commission on May 12, 2004 (ER 37-04, Attachment 6). Situation The City has received an application for a General Plan amendment and Rezoning (GP/R) on an 8,310 square-foot parcel at 1661 Mill Street, currently known as the American Legion Post 66. Specifically, the applicant would like to amend the property's land use and zoning designations from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Tourist Commercial (C-T) to allow the existing use to remain in a conforming status. The R-2 district does not allow clubs and organizations such as American Legion to be established, modified, or expanded. The existing use is therefore considered a legal non-conforming use. Plans to remodel and perform additions to the building are proposed in the future. C-T zoning would more accurately reflect the property's historic use and relationship with adjoining uses. Plannins Commission Action On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and amend the General Plan Land Use and b - I l Council Agenda Report—GP/R/ER 37-04 June 15,2004 Page 2 zoning designations from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Tourist Commercial (C-T),based on findings, conditions and mitigation measures (Attachment 3, 4 and 5). Public testimony and the Commission's discussion focused on future land uses for the property. The neighborhood is comfortable with the existing use, however concerns were raised about the potential for other conflicting commercial uses at this site in the future should American Legion sell the property. The C-T zone allows for a variety of commercial uses, some of which may not be compatible with the residential neighborhood. Realizing this, staff recommended a condition of approval to require a Special Considerations, "S" zoning overlay for the site. The Commission was satisfied that the S overlay zone would protect the residential neighborhood from inappropriate uses in the future. The Planning Commission staff report and draft hearing minutes are attached (Attachments 4& 5). General Plan Consistency The attached Planning Commission staff report, Attachment 5, evaluates the merits of the proposed Rezoning and General Plan Amendment for consistency with the General Plan. There are several General Plan policies that discuss non-residential uses next to residential uses, specifically LU 2.2.2, LU 2.2.4 and LU 2.2.13. The Commission found the existing use, and proposed amendment, to be consistent with these General Plan Policies and felt that the S overlay would help to keep future land uses consistent with these policies. Land Use Element Policy 2.6.2 is designed to preserve residential zoning and specifies criteria when residential zoning may be changed to non-residential. In this case, the site is a small site with no history of residential land uses. American Legion Post 66 has existed at this location for more than 50 years. The modification of this site from a residential to a commercial designation would not adversely impact the overall supply of housing opportunities. The Planning Commission found that the need to rezone the property to accommodate the existing use was best met at this location considering the proximity and access to the site in relation to the Veterans Memorial Building (SLO Vets Hall). The Vets Hall is within C-T zoning and the American Legion property would simply be a small extension of the C-T zoning. C-T zoning does not eliminate the possibility of housing at this site in the future since mixed-use projects are allowed within the C-T zone. Housing Element policies are geared towards the preservation of existing housing stock and the creation of additional residential zoning. In this case, however leaving the existing zoning as is, or changing the zoning, does not does change existing housing stock or potential housing. The existing creek, small size of the site, and its relationship to the Vets Hall are already factors that limit the development potential of the site. Special Considerations Overlay Zone As mentioned above, the Special Considerations overlay zone (S zone) was recommended by staff and the Planning Commission as a method of regulating future land uses at this site. The requirement of the S overlay zone is a recommended mitigation measure in the attached Initial LP ^� I v Council Agenda Report—GP/R/ER 37-04 June 15,2004 Page.3 Study, Attachment 6. As established in the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 17.56, the purpose of the S zone is to require an Administrative Use Permit prior to establishing any new use. Chapter 17.56, Purpose of the S zone: "The use permit requirement is intended to assure compatibility of the use with its surroundings or conformance with the general plan, or to determine if a proposed development solves problems such as noise exposure,flood hazard, airport hazard, or slope instability which are particularly severe on a given site. Such development review may also be used to protect areas of scenic or ecological sensitivity, wildlife habitat, or wildland fire hazard. As provided in Sections 17.58.020 through 17.58.080, the Administrative Hearing Officer may establish conditions relating to improvements, building location, access, and so on, which are more restrictive than provided in the underlying zone, in order to fulfill the intent of these regulations." In this case, the S overlay will serve to protect neighboring residential uses from potentially detrimental commercial uses. Additionally, the use permit process will ensure adequate review of new uses in conjunction with the creek, the flood zone and the Vets Hall. The Ordinance prepared for the S overlay zone can contain specific review criteria as determined appropriate by the City Council. The staff recommendation for the S zone would preclude the establishment of uses such as a service station, restaurant or retail store. Conclusion The General Plan amendment and rezoning is appropriate at this location based on the existing and long standing use of the property. The creek forms a natural separation from the residential district and the new zoning will be an extension of the C-T district at the Vets Hall site. The project site is only 8,310 square feet in size and does not have access adjacent to or within residential properties since it is accessed through an adjacent property within the C-T district. If the rezoning request were not approved, the American Legion meeting hall could remain in its present state, however a remodel of the building, as proposed, would not be possible since it is a non-conforming use. General Plan Amendment Schedule State Planning and Zoning Law and City Ordinance require that elements of the General Plan not be amended more than four times during any calendar year. Currently, the City has four separate applications pending to amend the General Plan. More amendments will need to be considered before the end of the year. Coordination is necessary to "batch" these requests together for Council action. Therefore, staff is proposing the "approve in concept" process to combine these current requests as one amendment. All four amendment requests will return to Council for final action at the July 6, 2004, regular meeting, with formal resolutions and ordinances for the various proposals. Council Agenda Report—GP/R/ER 37-04 June 15,2004 Page 4 CONCURRENCES The rezone request has been review by other City Departments including Public Works, Utilities, Building and Fire. No significant comments or concerns were noted. 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. Amending the General Plan for this location will not significantly alter revenues since the new designation will not result in significant site changes. The property is too small to allow for significant commercial or residential development. ALTERNATIVES 1. Consider other zoning options that may be appropriate for this site considering the existing and proposed continuation of the land use. 2. Deny the General Plan amendment and rezoning based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan or other policy documents. 3. Continue action, if additional information is needed. Direction should be given to staff. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Applicant's project description 3. Planning Commission Resolution 5395-04 4. Planning Commission minutes 5. Planning Commission staff report 6. Initial Study of Environmental Impact 7. Draft Resolution "A" as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff 8. Alternative Draft Resolution `B"to deny the proposed project F:\GROUPS\COMDEV\CD-PLAN\Pdunsmore\Rezoning&PDs\37-04 American Legion\GPR 37-04 rpt(06-15-04).doc 11C WS-40A VICINITY MAP GP/R/ER 37-04 i' Attachment 2 MATT R. WALL 1734 Alta Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3005 phone: 543-5335, fax: -5022 March 4,2004 Planning Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street Gentlemen: This letter is written to append to an application for Re-Zoning and a General Plan Amendment from R-2 to a C-T zoning,plus an Administrative Use Permit,and it is accompanied by an application fee of$8,692. Granting of this request will permit the American Legion Post 66 to expand our current facility and consolidate our dining areas. (Please refer to Attachments 1 and 2.) (Relevant photos constitute Attachment 3.) This is written pursuant to a suggestion from Deputy Director Ron Vv senand, that we apply for C-T in lieu of R-3 re-zoning,in that the latter would result in spot zoning. Justification for this request is based on the following factors: consistency of zoning with a contiguous C-T use (the Veterans Memorial Building),compatibility of C-T uses at both parcels,separation from R-2 properties by space and natural barriers, land use transition,minimal environmental impacts,and planned uses congruent with historical uses of our facility. These are addressed in detail below. CONSISTENCY OF ZONING WITH A CONTIGUOUS C-T USE The Veterans Memorial Building is already zoned C-T. Thus, re-zoning of the American Legion parcel to C-T would avoid "spot zoning." Furthermore, the American Legion parcel provides a transition between the Veterans Memorial Building and R-2 properties to the southeast, south and west. Lastly, the American Legion parcel land use has never been residential in nature. (See Attachment 1.) COMPATIBILITY OF C-T USES AT BOTH PARCELS Veterans Memorial Building C-T uses As you are aware, the Veterans Memorial Building is a well-used facility. It houses offices,serves as a courtroom temporarily,is a polling place, and its kitchen.is used by Grass Roots II to prepare meals for the less fortunate. Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4,2004 - Page 2 The facility is the scene of numerous entertainment and fund-raising venues by private entities (both for profit and not-for-profit) throughout the year. Those venues attract tourists from all over the West. The C-T zoning remains highly appropriate for that parcel and is consistent with proposed C-T for our as well.. American Legion C-T uses We understand that lodges such as the American Legion are allowed uses under an Administrative Special Use Permit in a C-T zone. The American Legion has operated on this site for more than 52 years and was once a "conforming" use. This permit would merely once again legitimize our use. We are a non-conforming use at present, solely because of subsequent zoning changes. As with most other lodges, our use is for members only. [Let me state that except for requiring honorable service in the U. S. Armed Forces as a membership pre-condition, we do not discriminate against any group or individual.] We have a monthly membership meeting, a monthly dinner meeting and a once- quarterly "spouses invited" dinner meeting. We also rent our facility for other activities,such as wedding receptions and dinners,but the sponsoring individual for any particular non-Legion activity must be a member of this post. All of our activities are compatible with the uses of the Veterans Memorial Building. Furthermore, since nearly all of them are in the late afternoon and/or evenings mid- week, there is minimal if any competition for parking with users of the Veterans Memorial Building. We coordinate events with their board. We enjoy Veterans Memorial Building access and parking for our Post 66 benefit. SEPARATION FROM R-2 PROPERTIES Two characteristics separate the American Legion parcel from nearby R-2 parcels. natural barriers The back comer of our property on Mill Street is cut by an intermittent seasonal ditch or watercourse that runs between our parcel and the others on Mill Street. This natural barrier serves as a logical separation between land uses, such as C-T and R-2. spatial separation We enjoy a spatial separation between our facility and R-2 parcels facing Palm Street for three reasons: (a) the watercourse, as it heads south,has kept development away from it, and hence from our facility (b) the Legion years ago acquired an 18.5 x 50.0 parcel contiguous to our main parcel, and that also serves as a buffer,and (c) our use orientation is away from the R-2 parcels and towards the Veterans Memorial Building. In this regard, we have always attempted to be considerate, responsible neighbors. lI!' Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4,2004 - Page 3 LAND USE TRANSITION Not only are our uses compatible with the Veterans Memorial Building C-T uses, our building also serves as a visual screen and an acoustic buffer between the Veterans Memorial Building and the nearby R-2 parcels. This functions as an excellent transition parcel. Thus, the neighborhood benefits from our presence. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Granting the re-zoning and administrative use permit should have minimal, if any, adverse environmental impacts, as explained below. traffic considerations The only access to our parcel is across Veterans Memorial Building property. The primary point of ingress and egress is the vehicular entrance on Grand Avenue. A secondary point is an entrance on.Palm Street. We have not conducted a survey as to which entrance receives what proportion of use,but we feel confident the Grand Avenue entrance accounts for at least-three- fourths and quite possibly as high as nine-tenths of the vehicles using our facility. The proposed expansion of our facility is primarily a dining room that consolidates dining that now takes place in three areas,plus a kitchen,a storage area,and ADA- compliant restrooms. [Our current unisex restroom is not fully ADA compliant,and it is not practical to make it fully compliant.] The proposed additional facilities are for the convenience of our members. They are not expected to increase either our membership or our intensity of facility use. Therefore,because no increase in land use intensity is contemplated,because the vast majority of our traffic uses the Grand Avenue entrance, and because persons coming or going here do so during non-rush-hour times, we should have no adverse additional traffic impacts whatsoever on the neighborhood. retention of trees We recognize the natural treasure that the mature trees on our and nearby Veterans Memorial Building proerty constitute. During construction,we will take all practicable measures to reduce negative impacts on their root systems. Indeed,we will use root watering to help re-establish any root damage that occurs during construction. water quality Even though the drainage ditch or watercourse to the southwest of our property is not expected to be flowing during the construction season,we will take standard precautions to trap sediment and avoid sedimentation of the waterway. C� �g C ,I Re: Application for Re4oning and General Plan.Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4, 2004 - Page 4 flora and fauna The site is fully developed. What is not non-porous material is mowed grass. Thus it is highly unlikely that any threatened or endangered species reside on or use the site, with the possible exception of a few migrating birds. The proposed expansion would not affect them. archeological considerations To the best of our knowledge, no artifacts of historical or archeological interest were found during construction of the Veterans Memorial Building or our American Legion Hall. The foundation contemplated for the expansion would consist of shallow footings and stem wall reaching>_24 inches below finished grade. Therefore, it is unlikely that excavation would unearth anything of significance. However, should any artifacts of interest be unearthed during footing excavation, we would notify the City, so that the matter would be evaluated in a proper manner. PLANNED USES CONGRUENT WITH HISTORICAL USES history As previously mentioned, the American Legion Post 66 facility was originally built in 1951, and its use has remained essentially unchanged since then. contemplated future uses Our post will remain at its existing membership,which is declining by the way, as older members expire and fewer new ones join. Thus, the number of our functions is expected to remain a monthly membership meeting, a monthly dinner meeting, and a once quarterly dinner meeting for members and spouses. We submit that the proposed expansion efforts at 1661 Mill Street are bound to enhance the appearance of our facility, as the addition promises to be more aesthetically pleasing than the current patio and dining hall. (See Attachment 2.) ADMINISTRATIVE USE RESTRICTIONS We have been informed that Administrative Use Restrictions might be required as an accompaniment to the Administrative Use Permit, to prevent,say, a restaurant from being opened by a subsequent owner, should the American Legion sell the site. We have no problems with reasonable restrictions,but we do feel compelled to point out a few factors that should put fears of that sort to rest. I, Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for-proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4,2004 - Page 5 First,it is unlikely that the Veterans Memorial Building would take kindly to any non- compatible use. They are granting access solely to Arnerican Legion Post 66. Thus, any other use would have access and parking problems, as the Veterans Memorial Board would not be bound to extend access to a subsequent buyer.. Second, if we were to sell the site to another lodge organization, that entity would be bound by the same terms of the Administrative Use Permit you issued to us. You might want to require that if the property is sold to a bona fide different entity,a new use permit would have to be applied for. [The reason for the term bona fide is that it is not outside the realm of possibility that the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion could merge in the distant future, should both organizations experience a large drop-off in membership. The newly formed organization might have a different name,but the nature of the organization, the facilities use and intensity on the parcel would remain unchanged. Third, do you really wish to make something permanent at this point in time that may not make sense a few decades from now? We recommend Planning staff consider wording that would permit the City to bar incompatible or undesirable uses (such as a porn shop),without unduly tying anyone's hands. The call is yours,we are merely pointing out what may already be obvious to you. Thank you for your consideration of this application. Sincerely �l Matt R.Wall Expansion Committee Member American Legion Post 66 MRW: mrw CC: Expansion Committee Members (4) Post Commander Past Post Commander Adjutant Attachments: 1. Existing zoning of the Mill-Grove-Palm Streets -Grand Avenue block. 2. Present and Proposed Facilities. 3. Annotated Photographs. �p � t Re: Application for R&Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4,2004 - Page 6 Grove Street R®2 co L co tipRry (n CL ASSESSOR'S PARCEL 163.50 ft NUMBER: c 0011141,027 Ln LEGAL American Legion Post 66 DESCRIPTION 1661 Mill Street City of San Luis Lot = 8,175 sf R®2 Obispo; Phillips Addition; Block 137, Veterans Memorial Building Lot 4 and portion of 801 Grand Avenue Lot 14 C=T Grand Avenue Attachment 1 Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T,plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 4,2004 - Page 7 Fence Storage Shed 130 sq.ft. Fence - � Drainage Ditch HOgy BBQ Pit t ' r y 1 t .^ r *: Covered Patio -y Existing 756 sq.ft. Existing Legion Hall i ' Dining Room Y 2413 sq.ft.44" 4' 890 Sq. r 8� 19P Es S .ft F' Fence Fence I Existing Facilities Fence ' V.. , : Drainage Ditch ; 7`-r( r4 �c r > ..ham Z r7'TC' ♦ � ! yrW tr.,Y}�)' lfi t; 7: !m/� t ti v. t •.J � � ? .a st r .�.a,,. _ _ _ CT•�� .�..)j.',� '4 •� �X'''�,".A: Storage Kitchen Men Women 12'x16' 12'x16' m aA Dining Room a Existing Legion Hall • 1476 sq.ft. CO 9 e9 of ' (1.66x old one) 2413 sq.ft. >r a^.}.- ;. 4 320 sq.ft.patio Proposed Facilities Note: Existing 890 sq. ft. dining room, 130 sq.ft. storage shed,and 756 sq. ft.covered patio (total 1,776 sq.ft.) will be demolished Lot area is 50.0 ft x 163.5 ft= 8,175.0 sq.ft.. Dining Room addition (2,160 sq.ft. w/ covered notch on portico),320 sq.ft. patio,and existing 2,695 Legion Hall/Portico 4,905 sq.ft. (63% coverage,75% max) Attachment 2 j �r,Ar. .+.T•t r Y,w l r R � m� \ � ' .� � ��' i J�> �'W.�''�'�;'rrF lri`%;N•yr;Y rt! +'_ r.. � � •'+ �x if rT rl r. .. .. -• .w -rT/t rf VAI •�'r;+•p - 5 �,, r ' 1. 1 1 ' r ��•.„ Y !( lW4MF�`=' � rriTQ'r/ � . :: 1� '( S .r�` r� ..b ': • :� - 1,� '.' ^�. ^w. it .. .. I 1 � V� -.. . ..i,_ �� y: �, �{e• �+ Sj�'�'U :A, 11�?!G' / w a Y -.:"a�fip*;��il�'iyC�C�h�� x _ r y rfl� r i x�, y� r._IIYl'A �` \ r 4 -• i .rr,/ 's s r - � ''r IY k> "�-,.ar. n � F;ITiM`•R�1.�� 'F � 1 + .4 - J i- Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R-2 to C-T, plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street March 3, 2004 - Page 9 <_`�=_`fit. - �• y,. '•' ,� hal �' 3' :' aurlu^ _� . IEl . C!t.`tA'��`•1'�.'`L,�""i +b1k"v.•aNi:'1�' wx..,•.�.��n� ,' Legion Hall facing Mill Street. The fence and retaining wall to the right cut the corner of the property and are part of an old creek re-alignment. f" 71 Rear Lot Line of property. The small shed (top middle) is to be removed. The intermittent creek is behind the fence in the lower right corner of the photo. Presence of the creek has kept development on lots to the south and west of the Legion parcel away from the creek,thus providing distance between this property and adjoining uses. ' 9 xi � '+' �. "+.' A `•c.:.. �` ..4 I y1. M- fi tit iw r,%-: ++. F /,r'.t . {at+ ��fi t �. Y1.4.:t/, ,y�•Y.M`,x et. `, 5h /.Ct a"�CI�. ;. u �.. ,; t,� `*ir �) !t h �° ', � r �t7 ''7 ��♦Y'�•! ;L'�yJ�r..w .�'i� }+.��F��I Y'� : I q� 4, }.4n is •�L^. _ � 'I o: T s+:' 1'v t L any f �a '�` •+(.�- ;�'':i. t r \,�u ��� { r� 1 f Y• '� rpt rlt1 �'? r i vil1 '�� � 1;' �• j!:? �• a�( i+$i L, i !fv �.�•Yr tiS i./ r¢pl t - /��4� i �"� t. K i PF �,. y s r ) ar -� ,I tS ;:+ Y /� `)t )�.<Y•. / � 1/t {�s�"•LV �� ' � t 's ��1 t-t � .mss. � l�ij' !��Y + t t 't �' T y1�%�' ti k f1 I.�/cam •A � / •. r• 't Z ~"W ': m' ♦ ate. Vit. 1 1/a ti 4=t�� �.•1/�y��js / I nye' t .t 'I -.•y a V yf+'R M �i• S ,' j'\14F �. •� 4i R ? .1�. M1aS� Y'..M j, y., HHH . � 1 r i l 1 _,. t J yrs. !YY 1^. �I�Z1�t 3V ! ,•J17 � 1 Y: `A�l!t. .. I/1 r2 A_I n.f•,'�. .�... �- J,, h.}R�t� i.: Br -t"a jii 6.iv r K•: ' 7,;, lbr •/ •1 t f v1 .M�\Y-Yt.. iJ) -�.'l"f�'��Y�//, I. — a. • .. 1 1 1 1 1 n IV enTMIT"k. / cl- I • 1 { / 6 ordVal 00 so J I 1 • 1 / 1 1 1 f4l OT4Fn I 1 I ITFFtT@ 1 t ' r �-'� fir,. •c :•.. s ' �-.-,. TM 1�f"r c. Z „ti'p..w+ s::. �Sxv.v,i � .M � - t`.r�•'f ., �i ../mss."�� I-"A •! Y`u: Aa,F..�i2 N. 1 t44-J'e�{,�AC�^T�r s. a-.f �N� 2+�r.-y 4 � r'..w+^"'L_�r�n.t �i•�w.ra4„�. I lifr.!� u ! P� rJ. �� "� — � _�e�rC\�'C—_r v •••-_ !S }����+c��i., -+\; r• .r .'- z..' f^• 'w-:�;r�� t'^"F" ..A I s s.,,r ^ ��h 'Ic....� a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Attachment 3 RESOLUTION NO. 5395-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS FROM R-2 TO C-T FOR PROPERTY AT 1661 MILL STREET GP/R/ER 37-04 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 May 12, 2004 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application GP/R/ER 37-04, American Legion Post 66, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the draft mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff; BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the Commission. 2. The proposed rezoning is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policies regarding Residential zoning and Commercial zoning, which place a priority on preserving residential uses and considering the impact of commercial uses adjacent to residential uses. The rezoning is appropriate at this site since it will not introduce new detrimental commercial uses into a sensitive residential area. Instead it will allow the existing use to conform. 3. The existing property is not conducive to residential development since it is a very small site at the edge of the C-T district and an existing similar use. Furthermore the site is separated from other residential uses by a creek and a public street. 4. The Special Considerations overlay zone will allow adequate review of uses on this site in the future to ensure compatibility with the residential neighborhood, the creek, the flood zone, and to ensure adequate parking and access. Resolution No. 5395-04 � � Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The Commission hereby recommends adoption of said mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the request (GP/R/ER 37-04) for a general plan amendment and rezoning with incorporation of the following mitigation measures and project conditions into the project: Cultural Resources 1. During construction, in the event that subsurface cultural or historic material is discovered on the property, all activities shall cease in the affected area until the area is surveyed by an archeologist/historian approved by the City. At that time a subsurface testing program shall be initiated in order to determine the presence or absence of any historic or pre-historic materials on the site. Under the direction of the archaeologist/historian, a mitigation plan shall be developed and approved by the environmental coordinator. Monitoring Program: Ongoing field inspections by City staff and construction staff awareness shall ensure compliance with measure #2. The project shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Demolition Ordinance for the demolition or relocation of the existing residence upon submittal of construction permit applications. Land Use and Planning 2. As part of the re-zoning of the property a Special Considerations "S" overlay zone shall be applied to the property consistent with Chapter 17.56 of the Zoning Regulations. The S overlay designation will ensure future land use compatibility with the site specifically related to the following site constraints: a. `B"flood zone as designated on FEMA maps for this property. b. Adjacent sensitive residential uses. c. Creek adjacency and creek setback. d. Parking and access agreement with the Veterans Memorial Hall. Monitoring Program: The S overlay shall be recorded onto the City Zoning Map with the change of zoning from R-2 to C-T, with the new Zoning to be C-T-S. A copy of the special considerations for the site shall be placed into the property address file, the GIS information database and into the City S overlay folder maintained by the Community Development Department. Resolution No. 5395-04`----,!—) - Page 3 Conditions: 1. Exterior site changes or construction shall be subject to architectural review to ensure consistency with City creek setback policies, neighborhood compatibility, and the City's Community Design Guidelines. 2. Any substantial change to the existing use or any new use at the site shall be subject to review and approval of an Administrative Use Permit. The following uses shall be prohibited at this site: a. Service Station b. Restaurant c. Retail stores On motion by Commissioner Boswell, seconded by Commissioner Loh, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Christianson, Boswell, Miller,Loh, Aiken, Osborne, and Caruso NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 12d'day of May, 2004. Ron d Whisenan , Secretary Planning Commission Le � � � Planning Commission M.. __.as - AttachmeOnt 4 May 12,2004 Page 4 AYES: Commrs. Loh, Miller, Osborne, Boswell, Aiken, Christianson, and Caruso NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The motion carried on a 7:0 vote. 2. 1661 Mill Street. GP/R and ER 37-04: Request to change the existing medium- density (R-2) residential plan designation and zoning to Tourist Commercial (C-T), including Environmental Review; R-2 zone; American Legion Post 66, applicant. (Phil Dunsmore) Associate Planner Philip Dunsmore presented the staff report recommending the Planning Commission recommend the City Council amend the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land use designation from Medium-Density Residential to Tourist-Commercial, approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration„ and rezone the property from Medium-Density Residential (R-2) to Commercial-Tourist with a "special considerations" overlay (C-T-S). PUBLIC COMMENTS: Matt Wall, 1734 Alta Street, Chairman of Expansion Committee, supported the staff recommendation, and discussed some future remodeling plans they plan on addressing. Gary Fowler, Mill Street, supported the request and noted that Post 66 is trying to get an exit installed by the front part of the building, which would exit onto Mill Street and would alleviate some problems. Mary Beth Schroeder, 2085 Wilding Lane, opposed the zone change. Jim Tunk, Santa Maria, asked if was possible to permit the veterans to modify the building but leave the zoning the same. Daniel Oxberger, 1641 Mill Street, expressed concern that staff is qualifying his back yard as the buffer zone between these two properties and noted that some of the issues directly impact his property. There were no further comments made from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Vice-Chair Boswell moved the staff recommendation. Seconded by Commr. Loh. AYES: Commrs. Boswell, Loh, Miller, Osborne, Aiken, Christianson, and Caruso NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None LV Planning Commission Mi. - ,as May 12,2004 Page 5 The motion carried on a 7:0 vote. 3. 3592 Broad Street. U/TR/ER 24-03 (Tract 2534): Mixed-use development permit and Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a project with 82 dwellings and 35,000 square feet of commercial floor area, including Environmental Review; C-S-S zone; Broad St. Partners, LP, applicant. (Michael Codron) Continued from April 28, 2004. (To be continued to a date uncertain.) This item was continued to a date uncertain, without discussion, to allow staff additional time to coordinate review of the revised traffic study with Caltrans. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 4. Staff: A. Agenda Forecast: Deputy Director Whisenand gave an agenda forecast of upcoming items. 5. Commission: The Commission briefly discussed the agenda that was to be on the website. ADJOURMENT: With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for May 26, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chamber. Respectfully submitted by Irene Pierce Recording Secretary Attachment 5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM#2 BY: Philip Dunsmore, Associate Planner (781-7522) MEETIN"ATE: May 12, 2004 FROM: Ronald Whisenand, Deputy Director- Development Revi4 /Z, FILE NUMBER: GP/R/ER 37-04 PROJECT ADDRESS: 1661 Mill SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change the property's designation from Medium Density Residential to Commercial Tourist for the existing American Legion building at 1661 Mill Street. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Planning Commission resolution which recommends that the City Council: I. Approve a resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Element map to change the land use designation for the site from Medium Density Residential to Tourist Commercial and approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 94-03). 2. Adopt an ordinance changing the zoning on the subject property from Medium Density Residential (R-2) to Commercial Tourist (C-T). BACKGROUND Situation The applicant would like to change the current R-2 zoning to C-T in order to allow the existing American Legion building to remain in a conforming status. The existing site is currently utilized for the American Legion Post 66 as it has for over 50 years. The R-2 district does not allow clubs and organizations such as American Legion to be established, modified, or expanded. The existing use is therefore considered a legal non-conforming use. Plans to remodel and perform additions to the building are proposed in the future. C-T zoning would more accurately reflect the property's historic use and relationship with adjoining uses. Data Summary Address: 1661 Mill Street Applicant: American Legion Post 66 Zoning: Medium Density Residential General Plan: Medium Density Residential Environmental status: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared (ER 37-04) LP -a�- GP/R 37-04 1661 Mill Street Page 2 Site Description The subject parcel is an 8,310 square foot lot located at 1661 Mill Street adjacent to the parking lot of the Veterans Memorial Building at the corner of Mill Street and Grand Avenue. Currently the site is used for the American Legion Post meeting facility. The property has frontage on Mill Street, however the site is oriented towards the parking lot at the Veterans Memorial Building within the C-T zone. The adjacent , property to the west and southX R-3 7,01 ✓contain single-family dwellings, %` \ " n while properties to the north �; contain multi-family dwellings \ \R-2,, within the R-2 district. A portion �/ of the site nearest Mill Street is , ` �` within a "B" flood zone as shown '" r on City Flood zone maps. A creek C-T - stovers Ha�� " American Legion intersects the west edge of the 1661 Mill Sheet property as it enters the site from a Proposed GT culvert below Mill Street. The existing structure housing the �\ \ American Legion use is built to the ,\ "R-2 !' edge of the creek with part of the structure forming a retaining wall to direct the creek flow. Proiect Description The applicant is proposing a General Plan Land Use Element map amendment and a rezoning as illustrated in the exhibit above. The purpose of the rezoning is to make the existing use a conforming use and to allow a remodel and addition to the building in the future. No formal plans to perform the addition and remodel are included with this application. However the exhibit on Attachment 3 (applicant project description) includes conceptual plans to remodel the facility following approval of the General Plan amendment. EVALUATION General Plan Consistency The following paragraphs evaluate the merits of the proposed Rezoning and General Plan Amendment for consistency with the General Plan. The General Plan policy is in italics followed by a staff response. Cp 'a� GP/R 37-04 1661 Mill Street Page 3 General Plan Land Use Element, General Plan Digest LU 2.2.2: Separation and Buffering Residential areas should be separated or screened from incompatible, nonresidential activities, including most commercial and manufacturing businesses, traffic arteries, the freeway, and the railroad. Residential areas should be protected from encroachment by detrimental commercial and industrial activities. Staff response: The site already contains a natural separation from the residential district due to the creek channel and associated riparian vegetation. The proposed zone change will not constitute a change in land use since the land use already exists and has been at this site for over 50 years. The type and intensity of the existing commercial use is compatible with nearby residential uses and does not fit the criteria of a detrimental commercial or industrial activity. New uses can be regulated in the future through the adoption of a Special Considerations (S) overlay zone for the property as recommended by proposed mitigation measures. The S overlay requires a Use Permit for any new use. See Attachment 4 for the proposed Initial Study and recommended mitigation measures. LU 2.2.4: Residential Next to Nonresidential In designing development at the boundary between residential and nonresidential uses, protection of a residential atmosphere is the first priority. Staff response: As mentioned above, the site can be regulated through the incorporation of an S overlay, therefore requiring any new uses to be reviewed for compatibility with the residential neighborhood. The proposed rezoning does not include a change in land use that would be detrimental to the residential atmosphere since the existing land use is proposed to remain. LU 2.2.13:Nonresidential Activities Residential areas may accommodate limited nonresidential activities which generally have been compatible, such as child day care, elementary schools, churches, and home businesses meeting established criteria. Staff response: Since the existing and proposed continuation of the land use is an allowed use within the R-3 and R-4 districts it is considered to be compatible with residential activities. The use, considered under the Zoning Regulations definitions, fits the criteria of a Club, Lodge or Private Meeting Hall. No complaints or issues of compatibility between the existing use (American Legion Post 66) and the residential neighborhood exist within City records. No changes to the existing use are proposed following a rezone of the property, however, a remodel and expansion of the existing structure is proposed. GP/R 37-04 1661 Mill Street Pa.-e 4 LU 2.6.2: Boundary Adjustments The City may adjust land-use boundaries in a way that would reduce land designated as residential, only if: A) A significant, long-term neighborhood or citywide need, which outweighs the preference to retain residential capacity, will be met, and; B) The need is best met at the proposed location and no comparable alternative exists. Staff response: The boundary adjustment will remove land designated as residential and replace it with a commercial designation that could impede the development of residential dwelling units on this site in the future. The Planning Commission should consider whether findings A and B above could be made for this site considering the long history of the American Legion Post at this property. City records do not identify any former residential uses for this site. The vicinity is developed with a variety of tourist serving and multi-family uses that cater to the proximity of Cal Poly State University. The site is naturally separated from residential uses due to the creek swale, the orientation of the building and its access. The applicant originally approached the City with a proposal to rezone the property to R-3 to retain the residential status of the site and still allow the meeting hall to conform, however staff's direction was to rezone the site to C-T to be compatible with the SLO Vets Hall. R-3 would produce spot zoning since it would be a single lot between R-2 and C-T. Staff believes findings A and B can be met since the site is oriented towards the Vets Hall property and is accessed from this property. The need to allow the continued compatibility of the existing use of the site with the adjacent C-T district outweighs its potential for future residential development since the site is a very small site with flood zone constraints, limited access and a creek that cuts into a portion of the site. The need to accommodate the existing American Legion Post at this site is best met at the proposed location and comparable alternatives do not exist. Since the C-T district allows mixed-use development (residential and commercial), the rezoning does not eliminate residential development in the future should the constraints to development be overcome. The property location, access and adjacent uses predominantly support the proposed land use change. LU 3.4.3:Appropriate Uses Tourist Commercial uses are those which primarily serve the traveling public. Tourist Commercial areas should accommodate motels, restaurants, service stations, recreational uses, and minor retail sales for the convenience of.travelers. To assure adequate space for visitor-serving uses, areas designated Tourist Commercial should not include offices, general retail stores, auto repair, or business services. Staff response: This particular site is not conducive to the typical array of C-T uses that are designed to serve the traveling public. A gas station, restaurant or retail use would certainly not be appropriate on this site given the number of constraints, lack of on-site parking and adjacency to R-2 residential properties. Given the existing use and the adjacent Vets Hall use, the amendment is appropriate. The Special Considerations overlay will serve as the review process to prohibit incompatible uses from establishing at this site in the future. b GP/R 37-04 1661 Mill Street Pa,ae 5 LU 3.4.4. Residential Neighbors Site planning, building design, and types of activities for new tourist-commercial development adjacent to residential areas should be carefully reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission, the Planning Commission, or both, to assure compatibility. Staff response: As mentioned above, the S overlay will ensure appropriate review of new development at this site in the future. The applicants proposed addition and remodel would require an application for Architectural Review. Existing and future use This application to rezone the property would allow for the continued operation and future remodel of the existing land use, American Legion Post 66. If the site were to remain R-2, the existing land use could still remain indefinitely, however any expansion to the structure designed to accommodate the same use would be prohibited. Additionally, the R-2 zone is more restrictive to property line setbacks. The existing structure more closely conforms to C-T property development standards since it is built very close to the east property line and has less than a 20 foot street yard. The C-T district does not require side yard setbacks unless the development is adjacent to a residential district that requires a setback. Only a 10 foot street yard is required. The R-2 district requires a minimum 5-foot setback and a 20 foot street yard. The intention of the rezone is to allow the applicant to remodel their facility and re-configure the dining area. Currently the site contains a2,413 square feet meeting hall, a 756 square feet covered patio, a large outdoor barbeque pit, and a separate dining room of 890 square feet. The proposal to remodel the facility would eliminate the covered patio, detached dining area and barbeque pit and replace it with a 1,476 square foot dining room the would include a kitchen, restrooms and a storage room. The new dining room would occupy a similar (slightly larger) footprint as existing improvements. The project would require an application for Architectural Review to consider the design of proposed improvements. OTHER DEPARTMENT AND AGENCY COMMENTS Public Works: Public Works has no specific concerns regarding the General Plan Amendment-, however the department would be analyzing the specific development for compliance with transportation and street standards. The proposed rezoning will have negligible effect on traffic generation since the current use exists and the proposed remodel of the facility would be considered a less than significant change to the use. The site currently relies upon an agreement to park and take access to the site from the Veterans Memorial Building parking lot. Changes in use at this site in the future would be limited due to limited parking and access opportunities. ALTERNATIVES GP/R 37-04 1661 Mill Street Page 6 1. Approve a resolution recommending that the City Council deny the proposed rezoning, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan as specified by the Planning Commission. 2. Continue review of the rezoning with specific direction to the applicant and staff. Attached: Vicinity Map Applicant's statement and project description Initial Study (ER 94-03) Resolution for approval _ Attachment 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER#37-04 1. Project Title: American Legion Post 66, GP/R 37-04 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: Philip Dunmore, Associate Planner(805) 781-7522 4. Project Location: 1661 Mill 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: American Legion Post 66 1661 Mill Street SLO CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: Medium Density Residential (R-2) 8. Description of the Project: General Plan Amendment and Rezone to change the property's designation from Medium Density Residential to Commercial Tourist (CT) to accommodate future expansion of the exiting meeting hall for American Legion Post 66. The existing location has been utilized as an assembly room and kitchen for the American Legion for 52 years and the proposed rezoning would allow the use to become a conforming use, allowing options for minor expansion in the future. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The subject parcel is an 8,310 square foot lot located at 1661 Mill Street adjacent to the parking lot of the Veterans Memorial Building at the comer of Mill Street and Grand Avenue. Currently the site is used for the American Legion Post meeting facility. The property has frontage on Mill Street, however the site is oriented towards the parking lot at the Veterans Memorial Building within the C-T zone. The adjacent property to the west and south contain single-family dwellings, while properties to the north contain multi-family dwellings within the R-2 district. A portion of the site nearest Mill Street is within a `B" flood zone as shown on City Flood zone maps. A channelized intermittent creek intersects the west edge of the property. The creek exists a culvert below Mill Street and surfaces at the northwest corner of the property. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: The project proposes the following: 1. General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use from Medium High Density Residential to Commercial Tourist. 2. Zone Map Change to change the zoning from R-2 to C-T. 3. Proposal for future remodeling and minor single story addition to the existing structure. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None CITY OF SAW Luis OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 t IP 10-1 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 XCultural 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 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. X 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 This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). CITY OF SAN Luis OwSPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CtiECKLI`�/ST22004 / 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. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, x 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. ignat Date I`�w.,W ��•Sc .o� D�P� IJ•��. �+� -rC6. For:John Mandeville, Printed Name Community Development Director CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC^KusT 2004 f l.0 'N 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 Code of Regulations. 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 Oeispo 5 INITIAL.STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 b �3rl Issues, Discussion and Sur 't' `Information Sources sources moo, fly Potentially Less Than No American Legion Post 66 GPi.- ,7-(r4 Agnificant Significant Significant Impact ER#37-04 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Inco rated 1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? _X_ b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited __X__ to,trees,rock outcroppings,open space,and historic buildings 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 or nighttime views in the area? Evaluation The project site is not located within a scenic vista nor is it near or within a hillside or other area of known locale of scenic value. Mill Street is not considered a road of moderate scenic value as designated within the General Plan Circulation Element. Changing the General Plan designation and Zoning Map of the property is not likely to alter the character of the neighborhood and would allow the existing use to remain as it has for over 52 years. The existing structure is a single story development that is similar in scale and massing to a small 2-bedroom residence. The proposed expansion of the facility following a rezone of the property would include removal of an existing 890 square foot dining room and replacing it with a 1,476 square foot dining room,kitchen and restrooms,all remaining within a single story structure. The Map amendment and proposed development plan will create less than significant impacts to site and vicinity aesthetics. Furthermore, expansion of the building and remodeling of the existing structure would be subject to Architectural Review by the City to ensure compatibility with the neighborhood and to reduce potential aesthetic impacts commonly associated with new development. As proposed, the new development will need to be designed to comply with property line setbacks and development standards for the C-T district should the rezoning be approved and a new development proposal is submitted to the City. No new substantial sources of light or glare are anticipated from the project since the proposal to expand the facility includes a minor addition to an existing structure that will be subject to further design review. Less than significant impacts are anticipated to occur from lighting since no substantial light sources are proposed with the project. Should the current property owner (American Legion Post) decide to sell the property following the rezoning to a more intensive use such as a restaurant or motel use as allowed within the C-T district,special review should be required to ensure the compatibility of such proposed uses in the future. A significant change in land use could introduce significant aesthetic impacts to the adjacent residential neighborhood in terms of building scale, lighting, and other aesthetic qualities. A logical mitigation measure to ensure the appropriate review of uses in the future is to require an "S" or Special Considerations Overlay Zone for the property. This is discussed in greater detail in the Land Use and Planning section,(Section 10)below. Mitigation Measures: See Land Use and Planning Section,Section 10 below. 2.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of _X_ Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps 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 __X__ their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? CITY OF SAN Luis Osispo 6 INmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKusT 2004 (S -33 Issues, Discussion and Sup my ..:iorrnation Sources sources Ken, / Pocentially ltcsiharr No American Legion Post 66 GP/R.,/-04 Issues t significant significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER#37-04 Mitigation Incorporated Evaluation The existing site and vicinity is not considered prime farmland nor is it recognized as prime farmland as shown on maps pursuant to the California Resources Agency. The property is a small,developed site currently identified as Medium Density Residential property in the General plan and currently surrounded by developed properties and public streets. No impacts to existing on site or off site agricultural resources are anticipated with development of the project site. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would theproject: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an —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 ozone precursors)? The purpose of this environmental review is to analyze a land use and zone change classification of this property only. No plans are currently proposed for development or re-development of the subject property. Impacts from the actual future development, including but not limited to a remodel or expansion of the existing structure,has the potential to create dust and vehicle emissions that may exceed air quality standards for a temporary and intermittent periods. Such impacts would be reviewed upon receipt of plans to re-develop the site. The proposed re-zoning allows the existing use to remain in a conforming status and therefore anticipated to create less than significant impacts to air quality. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a)' Have asubstantial adverse effect,either directly or indirectly or --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 anysiparian habitat or --X— other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department Fish Fsh 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) Confect 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.) r through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other.means? `i CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDv ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 LP, O 1 Issues, Discussion and Sul tit., Information Sources sources -)te....atly Potenuauy Less Than No American Legion Post 66 GP/k 67 04 Ilignificant Significant Significant Impact impactEssues Unless ER #37-04 Mitigation Incorporated An intermittent, partially channelized creek that exits a culvert below Mill Street intersects the west edge of the property. The drainage channel contains a seasonal creek that borders the rear yards of several residential properties before drainging into another culvert approximately 100 feet downstream. The creek is not considered a significant wildlife habitat, nor does it support significant riparian species. The creek, however, is subject to the City's Creek setback ordinance,which prohibits development within 20 feet of the top of the bank. The existing structure on the site is built right up to the creek bank and partially encroaches into the waterway with a concrete retaining wall and is therefore non-conforming with respect to the City's Creek Setback Ordinance. Additions or expansions to the existing building will require exceptions to the City's creek setback ordinance and will be subject to the City's Non-Conforming structure regulations. Currently, the project involves a land use change that would allow the existing land use to conform to the new land use designation. The existing designation restricts the use of the property to residential uses. Changing the allowable land use alone does not impact the existing creek, however future development of the property whether under the current land use designation of the property or future lands use may introduce impacts to the creek,therefore potentially impacting biological resources. The site is presently a developed property surrounded by public streets and other developed properties. No known biological resources would be impacted by the proposed land use map amendment. As discussed in the Land Use section, section 10, a Special Considerations overlay will need to be applied to the property to ensure appropriate review of future uses for consistency with the City's Creek Setback Ordinance, the B flood zone, and for compatibility with the neighborhood. 5.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: 'a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a _X_ historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 150645) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an _X_ archaeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of -X-- formal cemeteries? The property does not contain any known historic resources or former historic structures. The site does contain a strcture of which appears to be representative of early to mid 1950's construction. The structure is not considered a contributing historic resource and research of City records has not revealed any significant information about the site. The property has been used for an American Legion meeting site for over 50 years and the proposed re-zoning is intended to make the existing use a conforming use,therefore allowing expansion and remodel in the future. No known archeological sites exist on or adjacent to the project site. A search of City maps and archeological sites has not revealed any known pre-historic or historic site history. No known paleontological sites exist within the project site or vicinity. Since the applicant has stated that the intent of the rezone is to allow a future addition to the existing structure, construction on the property should be subject to standard mitigation to ensure the protection and documentation of cultural resources on the property if they are discovered during a future development project. Mitigation Measure: Cultural Resources a) During construction, in the event that subsurface cultural or historic material is discovered on the property, all activities shall cease in the affected area until the area is surveyed by an archeologist/historian approved by the City. At that time a subsurface testing program shall be initiated in order to determine the presence or absence of any historic or pre-historic materials on the site. Under the direction of the archaeologist/historian, a mitigation plan shall be developed and approved by the environmental coordinator. 6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? —X— b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient --X_ manner? 0111h2d CrrY OF SAN Luis OBISPo 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 Issues, Discussion and Sup `ins .,tformation Sources Sources item.....y Potentially res Than No American Legion Post 66 GP/k 1-04 _,.gm icant Significant Significant Impact g Issues Unless Impact ER#37-04 Mitigation Incorporated 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? - No known mineral resources are known to the project site or immediate vicinity. No impacts to energy and mineral resources are anticipated. 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would theproject: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse _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? H. Strong seismic ground shaking? —X-' III: Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? 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" would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction,or collapse? i d), Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1!.13 of the —X— Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? There are no known fault lines on 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 the life of proposed structures.Structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the Uniform Building Code. The project is not likely to result in the loss of topsoil or substantial erosion since the project does not involve the grading of slopes or existing site topography. Moderately expansive soils are common in the project vicinity. All new construction will require a City building permit, and therefore require construction that will meet or exceed building code standards for these soils. As proposed, the project to amend the land use map to allow a minor expansion of an existing facility is not likely.to create" significant impacts to area geology or soils. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the Dirtied: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment —X— through 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) Etnit 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? nMAP CITY OF SAN LUIS / OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKusT 2004 6lb1 P r 3tp Issues, Discussion and Sur It., information Sources Sources -)te....ally Potentially loss Than No American Legion Post 66 GP/k 1-04 _,ignificant Significant Significant Impact ER#37-04 Issues Impact Mitigation Incorporated o) 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 iCwould 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? The project proposal does not involve hazardous materials or hazardous conditions. The project involves a land use change, and the potential future expansion of an existing meeting lodge. No impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials are anticipated with the land use amendment. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the miect: . a) Violate any"-water quality standards or waste discharge 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(e.g.The production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Cieate or contribute runoff water which would exceed the - --X_ f existin or planned storm water systems or . capacity oexisting.or.. •P drainage systeg provide additional sources of runoff into surface waters (including,but not limited to,wetlands,"riparian areas,ponds, springs,creeks,streams;rivers,lakes,estuaries,tidal areas,bays, ocean;etc.)? 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 of offsite? _ .. e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ofthe site or 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 strictures which wouldimpedeimpede or redirect flood flows? h) Will the project introduce typical storm water pollutants into __X_ ground or surface waters? i) Willthe project alter ground water or surface water quality, tem o`rature,dissolved oxygen,or turbidity? A portion of the project site is within an area established as a known flood zone as shown within City FIRMA flood zone maps (Zone `B"). An existing drainage course as discussed within the Biological resources section above intersects the northwest corner of the property. This project will change the land use designation to allow the existing land use to conform with the City's Zoning Regulations. The land use map change will allow the property owner to expand the existing use in the L� CRY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 Issues, Discussion and Sur tir+, .oformation Sources sources 'oten.....ty Potentially Las Than No American Legion Post 66 GP/h)1-04 _ ignificant significant significant Impact ER#37-04 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated future,however,the proposed addition/expansion would be on a portion of the property outside of the B flood zone. As required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board the project will be required to utilize Best Management Practices in handling site drainage and runoff. The building code and City Policies will require the project's drainage to be directed towards the Public Right of Way in order to eliminate the potential for cross lot drainage and off-site impacts. As discussed in the Land Use and Planning section below an S overlay will be applied to the property to ensure appropriate review of any new uses or development at the property to avoid conflicts with the flood zone. Mitigation:See Land Use and Planning section below. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Woald theproject: a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of —X— an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating adenvironmental effect? b) Physically divide an established community? _X_ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural __X__ community conservationplans? The proposal involves changing the Land Use designation of the property to be consistent with the current and future use of the property. The property is currently zoned Medium Density Residential yet it contains a meeting facility that would not be allowed in the residential district. The proposed land use designation(Commercial Tourist)would allow the existing land use to become a conforming use. The new designation would also be consistent with the adjacent property currently in the C-T district. The new land use designation will be consistent with adjacent properties and allow this property to be utilized for expanded and upgraded use of the site as a meeting place for the American Legion Post.The site currently gains access from another property in the C-T district and both sites would operate together under one zoning district. The existing use does not conflict with any known habitat conservation plan or applicable land use plan, however the existing structure is considered non-conforming due to the City's Creek Setback Regulations.Amending the land use plan to allow the existing use to conform does not impact the non-conforming status of the structure and is not likely to increase site impacts that may be associated with habitat conservation plans for this location. Expansion or demolition of the existing building may, however conflict with the City's Creek Setback Ordinance, the City's Flood Management Regulations, or General Plan Policy designed to protect residential neighborhoods from encroaching commercial development. Since the existing use is not considered an intensive land use and it is not likely to generate significant noise or traffic impacts,continuation of the use is not likely to conflict with these applicable plans,however new uses or significant expansion of the existing use will require careful consideration in the future. Re-zoning the property with an "S" overlay will require new uses at the property to be reviewed for known site-specific concerns. In this case the site-specific concerns are: creek setback, flood zone, and neighborhood compatibility. The S overlay will require discretionary review in the form of an Administrative Use Permit to allow new uses on the site or substantial changes to existing uses. Mitigation Measure: Land Use and Planning 1. As part of the re-zoning of the property a Special Considerations "S" overlay zone shall be applied to the property consistent with Chapter 17.56 of the Zoning Regulations. The S overlay designation will ensure future land use compatibility with the site specifically related to the following site constraints: a. "B"flood zone as designated on FEMA maps for this property. b. Adjacent sensitive residential uses. c. Creek adjacency and creek setback. d. Parking and access agreement with the Veterans Memorial Hall. 11.NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise _X_ levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element,or general noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance? CrrY OF SAN Luis OBISPO t INmAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKusT 2004 U - 3 q Issues, Discussion and Sup. .tiny Information Sources Sources )t,. ..ally Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact American Legion Post 66 GP/R 37-04 UnlessImpact ER#37-04 Issues Mitigation incorporated b) . A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in ambient noise 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? A change in the land use designation to allow the continuation of the existing land use is not anticipated to generate noise impacts or increases in exiting ambient noise levels. Less than significant impacts or noise exposure to people is anticipated to occur with the proposed project. 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly -X-- (for. example by proposing new homes or businesses). or indirectly (forexample, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b). Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people —X— necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project will amend the City's General Plan, changing the site from a residential land use to a commercial land use,allowing the existing meeting hall to remain. City records do not identify any previous residential uses at this site and the current use is not residential in nature. The amendment would not eliminate existing housing stock or reduce the potential for residential uses in the future since the proposed land use designation (Commercial Tourist)conditionally allows multi-family residential projects. No residential uses are proposed with the current project. The project will not displace residents nor introduce population growth since it involves the only the re-zoning of a small site already developed with an existing meeting hall. 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? '"X+ b) Police protection? —X— c) Schools? —X_ d) Parks! "'X e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? --X- f) Other public facilities? The project will not create significant impacts to local public services since it is currently a developed site within a developed area of the City that is currently served by City utilities and associated infrastructure. No significant changes to the site are proposed with the amendment of the land use map. The sites size and proposed zoning would allow only minor site changes that would create less than significant impacts to public services. 14.RECREATION. Would theproject: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or _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? The project does not trigger park impacts or affect the use of recreational facilities since it is only a request to rezone the CITY OF SAN Luis OBIsPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 Ur �J Issues, Discussion and St xti,.& Information Sources Source\ ?o,. .ally Potentially Less Than No American Legion Post 66 GPlR 37-04 Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER#37-04 Mitigation Incorporated property to continue the existing use. The project will be developed near an existing University campus with a large quantity of known recreation facilities.No significant impacts to recreation facilities are anticipated. 15. TRANSPORTATIONfrRAFFIC. Would theproject: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the —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 equiparent)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 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 traffic_ atterits?_ Rezoning of the property is for the purpose of continuing the existing use at the site with plans for minor additions and remodeling. No changes to access are proposed, and the rezoning of the property is not anticipated to increase or change traffic flow to the site. The proposed project site is outside of the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan area. 16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would theProject: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable --X-- Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Requ"u'e or result in the construction or expansion of new water —X-- treatment,wastewater treatment,water quality control,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 in 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? _ Section 13.08.130B of the Municipal Code states that no polluted water may be discharged to a drainage system that flows to any creek or to the City storm drain system. The proposed remodel and minor expansion to the existing facility does not propose to discharge any drainage to nearby creeks or other natural drainage courses. In Summary the project is anticipated to create less than significant impacts to utilities and service systems if the site is developed consistent with City standards and in accordance with code requirements recommended by the City Utilities department. CrrY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 U �4o Issues, Discussion and Su, tin, .niormation Sources Sources 'oh ly Potentially Less Than No American legion Post 66 GP/k 37-04 Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER#37-04 Mitigation Incorporated 17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the —X-- 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? N/A 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 futureprojects) N/A c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause —X— substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? N/A CRY OF SAN Luis Ostsp0 14 INITIAL STUOV ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 (' 41 18.EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, orother 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. N/A 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. N/A 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. N/A 19. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element,July 2002 2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element,November 1994 3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element,May 1996 4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element,July 2000 5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation Element,July 1973 6. City of SLO General Plan Energy Conservation Element,April 1981 7. City of SLO Water and Wastewater Element,July 1996 8. City of SLO General Plan EIR 1994 for Update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements 9. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 10. City of San Luis Obispo,Land Use Inventory Database 11. Site Visit 12. USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service,Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County 13. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.govldlrp/FMMP/ 14. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County,Air Pollution Control District, 1995 15. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook,May 1996 16. 2001 City of San Luis Obispo Water Resources Report 17. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development Department 18. City of San Luis Obispo,Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines,on file in the Community Development Department 19. City of San Luis Obispo,Historic Site Ma 20. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Ma 21. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element,on file in the Utilities Department 22. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map,prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act,effective January 1, 1990 23. Flood Insurance Rate Ma (Community Panel 0603100005 C)dated July 7, 1981 24. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan 25. Architectural Review Guidelines 26. 1997 Uniform Building Code All documents listed above are available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department,990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,California(805)781-7522. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Cultural Resources 1. During construction, in the event that subsurface cultural or historic material is discovered on the property, all activities shall cease in the affected area until the area is surveyed by an archeologist/historian approved by the City. At that time a subsurface testing program shall be initiated in order to determine the presence or absence of any historic or pre-historic materials on the site. Under the direction of the archaeologist/historian, a mitigation plan shall be developed and approved by the environmental coordinator. Monitoring Program: Ongoing field inspections by City staff and construction staff awareness shall ensure compliance with measure #2. The project shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Demolition Ordinance for the demolition or relocation of the existing residence upon submittal of construction permit applications. Land Use and Planning 2. As part of the re-zoning of the property a Special Considerations "S" overlay zone shall be applied to the property consistent with Chapter 17.56 of the Zoning Regulations. The S overlay designation will ensure future land use compatibility with the site specifically related to the following site constraints: e. `B" flood zone as designated on FEMA maps for this property. f. Adjacent sensitive residential uses. g. Creek adjacency and creek setback. h. Parking and access agreement with the Veterans Memorial Hall. Monitoring Program: The S overlay shall be recorded onto the City Zoning Map with the change of zoning from R-2 to C-T, with the new Zoning to be C-T-S. A copy of the special considerations for the site shall be placed into the property address file, the GIS information database and into the City S overlay folder maintained by the Community Development Department. Attachment 1: Vicinity Map ®aim CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2004 r r 43 1 I RESOLUTION NO.####-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP AND ZONING MAP DESIGNATIONS FROM R-2 TO C-T FOR PROPERTY AT 1661 MILL STREET GP/R/ER 37-04 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 May 12, 2004 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application GP/R/ER 37-04, American Legion Post 66, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has considered testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the draft mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the project's mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the Commission. 2. The proposed rezoning is consistent with General Plan. Land Use Element policies regarding Residential zoning and Commercial zoning, which place a priority on preserving residential uses and considering the impact of commercial uses adjacent to residential uses. The rezoning is appropriate at this site since it will not introduce new detrimental commercial uses into a sensitive residential area. Instead it will allow the existing use to conform. 3. The existing property is not conducive to residential development since it is a very small site at the edge of the C-T district and an existing similar use. Furthermore the site is separated from other residential uses by a creek and a public street. 4. The Special Considerations overlay zone will allow adequate review of uses on this site in the future to ensure compatibility with the residential neighborhood, the creek, the flood zone, and to ensure adequate parking and access. lP -44 Resolution No.####-04,�� Page 2 SECTION 2. Action. The Commission hereby recommends adoption of said mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the request (GP/R/ER 37-04) for a general plan amendment and rezoning, as shown on attached Exhibit A with incorporation of the following mitigation measures and project conditions into the project: Cultural Resources 1. During construction, in the event that subsurface cultural or historic material is discovered on the property, all activities shall cease in the affected area until the area is surveyed by an archeologist/historian approved by the City. At that time a subsurface testing program shall be initiated in order to determine the presence or absence of any historic or pre-historic materials on the site. Under the direction of the archaeologist/historian, a mitigation plan shall be developed and approved by the environmental coordinator. Monitoring Program: Ongoing field inspections by City staff and construction staff awareness shall ensure compliance with measure #2. The project shall be reviewed for consistency with the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Demolition Ordinance for the demolition or relocation of the existing residence upon submittal of construction permit applications. Land Use and Planning 2. As part of the re-zoning of the property a Special Considerations "S" overlay zone shall be applied to the property consistent with Chapter 17:56 of the Zoning Regulations. The S overlay designation will ensure future land use compatibility with the site specifically related to the following site constraints: a. `B" flood zone as designated on FEMA maps for this property. b. Adjacent sensitive residential uses. c. Creek adjacency and creek setback. d. Parking and access agreement with the Veterans Memorial Hall. Monitoring Program: The S overlay shall be recorded onto the City Zoning Map with the change of zoning from R-2 to C-T, with the new Zoning to be C-T-S. A copy of the special considerations for the site shall be placed into the property address file, the GIS information database and into the City S overlay folder maintained by the Community Development Department. Conditions: 1. Exterior site changes or construction shall be subject to architectural review to ensure consistency with City creek setback policies, neighborhood compatibility,. and the City's Community Design Guidelines. Resolution No.####-04 Page 3 2. Any substantial change to the existing use or any new use at the site shall be subject to review and approval of an Administrative Use Permit. The following uses shall be prohibited at this site: a. Service Station b. Restaurant c. Retail stores On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2004. Ronald Whisenand, Secretary Planning Commission Attachment 7 Resolution "A" RESOLUTION NO. (2004 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1661 MILL STREET (GP/R/ER 37-04) 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 May 12, 2004, and recommended approval of Application GP/R/ER 37-04, a request to amend the City's Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map designations from Medium. Density Residential (R-2) to Tourist Commercial Special Considerations (C-T-S); and WHEREAS, the City Council 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 June 15, 2004,for the purpose of considering Application GP/R/ER 37-04; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Planning Commission, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,presented at.said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policies regarding Residential zoning and Commercial zoning, which place a priority on preserving residential uses and considering the impact of commercial uses adjacent to residential uses. The rezoning is appropriate at this site since it will not introduce new detrimental commercial uses into a sensitive residential area. Instead it will allow the existing use to conform. 2. The City Council finds and determines that the project's mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the Council. 3. The existing property is not conducive to residential development since it is a very small U ,41 Resolution No. (2004 Series) Page 2 site at the edge of the C-T district and an existing similar use. Furthermore the site is separated from other residential uses by a creek and a public street. 4. The Special Considerations overlay zone will allow adequate review of uses on this site in the future to ensure compatibility with the residential neighborhood, the creek, the flood zone, and to ensure adequate parking and access. Section 2. Action. The Council does hereby approve the proposed General Plan amendment and Rezone in concept, and directs staff to return the project to Council on July 6, 2004, with a resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Map, and an ordinance changing the zoning of the subject property. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES:. ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2004. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Diane Reynolds, Acting City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jon th well, City Attorney LP -4g Attachment 8 Resolution `B" RESOLUTION NO. (2004 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1661 MILL STREET (GP/R/ER 37-04) 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 May 12, 2004, and recommended approval of Application GP/R/ER 37-04, a request to amend the City's Land Use Element Map and Zoning Map designations .from Medium Density Residential (R-3) to Tourist Commercial (C-T); and WHEREAS, the City Council 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 June 15, 2004, for the purpose of considering Application GP/R/ER 37-04; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for the project; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly considered all evidence, including the recommendation of the Planning Commission, testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: [Council specifies fmdings] Section 2. Denial. The General Plan amendment and Rezone proposed at 1661 Mill Street(GP/R/ER 37-04) is hereby denied. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Resolution No. (2004 Series) Page 2 The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 2004. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Diane Reynolds, Acting City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jonathan Lowell, City Attorney lP '' -- _._. ....._. —_ Julie r Connor San Luis Obispo appeal doc _ v. RECEIVED 2 CAO FIN D I R CVic;ACAO � FIRE CHIEF JUN 14 2004 , ATTORNEY ,CPWDIR l 1 LI i� 1A ,2'CLERK/ORIG ,g POLICE CHF SLO CITY CLERK 17 WT — .2, RTC DIR r }2 UTIL DIP d 40 �-� RED FILE To the Mayor and City Council MEETING AGENDA City of San Luis Obispo DATE�� ITEM # l0 California. Thursday,June 10,2004 j Gentlepeople, i The following is an abbreviated version of the remarks that I would like to make at the June 15 meeting to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation for a zoning change for the American Legion property at 1661 Mill Street. I have cut my remarks as short as possible so that I could try to fit them into the 3 minute limit. I ask a bit of indulgence on the time limit since I was denied the possibility of making a formal appeal that would have given a bit more time. I understand a that the planning Commission staff will thoroughly review these remarks and j make a recommendation on their basis. I request that the text of the original recommendation as well as any comments and recommendation on this letter be made available to me before the meeting. An email response as soon as convenient will be most useful to me. I I Good evening. My name is Jim Tonge; I live with my wife, Shirley, at 2177 Lake Marie Drive in unincorporated North Santa Barbara County. j. The proposed rezoning action circumvents the city's published goal of increasing residential space. My property at 727-729 Park Street and other neighboring properties are adversely impacted. i I am not simply an absentee landlord. I purchased this property in part to provide a home for either Shirley or me to have a more urban, smaller residential place to live as we aged or lost a member of our marriage. This neighborhood, and my property with its park-like setting abutting a creek, a one-block cul-de-sac with immediate access to public transportation seemed perfect for us. This j neighborhood, including the American Legion building, is an i I (Julie 'Connor San Luis Obispo appeal.doc _ _ _ __ _ _ PageTi i i excellent place for senior housing. t I am not opposed to the Legion or any of its goals. I am also a veteran i and a member of an organization related specifically to one of the units in which I served. I was more than 30 years in the Air Force. j My duties included travel behind the Iron Curtain and search for people missing in action from WWII. On December 26, 1979, 1 was the first person from America to visit the crash site of an airman who was lost on September 11, 1944. This other 9/11 was also a day of great loss for America. I have just returned from a memorial service 3 for this airman held on May 28, 2004. It took these 25 years for the procedures to be carried out to bring him home. Now he lies in a grave in Tulsa, Oklahoma next to his brother who died in a bomber crash in the same month. I emphasize this because the membership of the Legion is declining. Sadly, the veterans of WWII are dying at a rate exceeding 1000 per day. Again sadly, the demographics of their membership might make this action unnecessary At the Planning Commission meeting that made this recommendation, speakers for the applicant in the first agenda item cast a great deal of personal criticism against the appellant. Dr.-------- a member of the commission gave us a"Civics Lesson." He explained that the character and motivation of the applicant or appellant were not to be considered. Government action was required to stay within the bounds of policy, laws and regulations without regard to other considerations. There could be no favoritism based on an opinion of worthiness. According to the application by the Legion, after much discussion with city staff about getting a variance to make improvements, the suggestion to change the zoning came from the city staff. This action seems to be a"work-around"to avoid the restrictions of the variance procedures. I understand that the nonconforming use of the property may continue if the property is sold to a buyer who expects to continue this use. I also understand that no notice will be made to affected property i i Julie O'Connor;San Luis Obispo appeal,ioc Page 3. I owners. I think this will make a serious problem if the property is sold to some less conventional organizations or groups that wants to continue the use of"meeting hall." Almost anything may be done by j organizations within their own property. Wouldn't city staff be required by precedent to also suggest a"work-around"to organizations such as The Aryan Nation* or the Man-Boy Love Society **in their attempts to get a variance for some "special" need? j I urge you to reject this application or to send it back to the planning commission to work out a different solution. I will be happy to assist in this. City staff has been most courteous and helpful to me in preparing this presentation. Thank you, Goodnight. I am grateful for the assistance and understanding of Planning Commission staff. I believe that we may find a solution that satisfies the needs of all concerned. i With my warmest regards, HsH James M. Tonge • ' hM:Hww%v.post-gazette.com/nation/20020728arayans2.asp • •' httn://facully-web.at.niw.edu/Commstud/freespeech/cont/cascs/classnwsm.html I i c � RECEIVED Roger Larson 430 Lawrence Dr JUN 1 5 2004 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SLO CITY CLERK June 15, 2004 RED FILE Planning Department t M �fIjN G AGENDA City of San Luis Obispo DATEDITEM #_2�U 990 Palm Street t San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Application for Re-Zoning and General Plan Amendment from R- 2 to C-T, plus a request for an Administrative Use Permit, for proposed expansion of American Legion Post 66, 1661 Mill Street Gentlemen: This letter is written to support the application for Re-Zoning and a General Plan Amendment from R-2 to a C-T zoning which will permit the American Legion Post 66 to expand their current facility. I own the property at 1660 Palm, which is directly adjacent to the Legion. The Legion has proven to be a good and considerate neighbor. The improvements to the facility are strongly supported. -19 mfn I NCIL TCDD DIF {J CAO Z.-'=1N DIR j2-ACAO ;2'=1RE CHIEF aATTORNEY Y-W DIR CLERK/ORIG 2-POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT HEADS. R E C DIR j% UTIL DIR