Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/1988, C-9 - •, 17' �, r Lh t v„y :,3 R n„Y yRp a} 1 F(4S 'r '. f f z 3 C,�t ,.I T>.FIE r.i;F•jy':Y ir' ,��r. �N � �T n 'l�`7�K� a ._I 'ri Y Ilr{��+�• {��Ok iF .� .r , *� .��Tr FIS°�:L�tt� RSyEsEN...l Post Office Boz 1796.5& 5)544-2013 December 2, 1988 Respond by: NG lr AGEND ^�' DATE �= ITEM Mr. Mike Multari B'tihY 9 Clark-ofig. City Hall P.O_ Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-8100 Mr. Gurnee's letter of 11/29/88 might confuse the issue of interpreting Ordinance 1104 to allow a right of way field office, in Westwind Business Park. The thrust of his argument is that such an interpretation conflicts with the general plan policy regarding government office location. Nothing could be further from the truth. The general plan policy does not give Walter Center a monopoly on ALL government agencies. Walter Center has been granted what could be termed a monopoly on "OFFICES OF GOVERNMENT HUMAN SERVICES AGENCIES DEALING DIRECTLY WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC" in that it is restricted to such agencies and as yet no other location has been approved for such agencies. Because of this restriction LOCATING CALTRANS AT WALTER CENTER WILL REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT. The requested interpretation does not weaken the bipolar strategy. If Caltrans, a technical service agency, were located in Westwind as opposed to Walter Center, it would allow more space for human service agencies at Walter Center. Otherwise, if Caltrans fills Walter Center, human service will again be scattered thus working against the bipolar strategy. LOCATING THE CALTRANS RIGHT OF WAY OFFICE AT WESTWIND IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE BIPOLAR STRATEGY THAN LOCATING IT AT WALTER CENTER. There may be an additional ISSUE OF PUBLIC POLICY involved here as well. When the space needs of human service agencies was less than the space available in the Walter Center, rental rates were held in check. The general plan policies and use permit restrictions on the Walter Center worked. When the demand exceeds supply, if it hasn't already, the policy and restrictions will work to increase rental rates for these agencies. This cannot be considered to be in the public interest. The interpretation requested would not force Caltrans to Westwind. It would simply ALLOW WESTWIND TO COMPETE WITH THE WALTER CENTER to provide the best and most economical solution for Caltrans space needs. WESTWIND IS AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES AGENCIES like a Caltrans field office. WESTWIND IS MUCH CLOSER TO CALTRANS' EXISTING FACILITY. Locating Caltrans at Westwind would "FREE UP" MORE SPACE FOR GOVERNMENT HUMAN SERVICE AGENCIES DEALING DIRECTLY WITH THE PUBLIC in the Walter Center. The requested interpretation is REASONABLE, IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND CLEARLY CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN (Sections 17.22.010 & 17.62.040 as amended by GP/CR 1229 in Ordinance 1087 - February, 1987). To allow the efforts of competing entrepreneurs to convert a simple interpretation in to lengthy public process would not be in the public's best interest. Given Mssrs. Walters & Gurnee strenuous objection referral of the issue to the Planning Commission or to the Community Development Director for an administrative use permit would only delay an issue which the city council will probably have to decide. Thank you for your help in this matter. I had no idea when I made the request that it would trigger such a reaction by Don & Keith. Sincerely, RECEIVED J D. French EEC 2 1�8 CITY CLERK sAwcutso .cn CC. CAO; City Council Members MEET, AGENDA r • DATE °� e � ITEM # �ALT�R CROS. CONSTRUCTION Day It TELEPHONE 805/543-5854 A GENERAL ENGl.NEERJNG CONTRACTOR P.O. BOX 809 SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93406 Dznotes action by Leap Person Raspyntl by: �.Council I'�LA 0 fly Att. November 29, 1988 KCClerk-ong. [VlnikE irucr/I ,ity.. Ms. Penny Rappa City Councilwoman City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Ms. Rappa: It has come to my attention that the proposed change in zoning to allow government office use at the Westwind Business Park on South Street is on the December 6th City Council agenda under a conseht item. If this use is to be approved by the City Council, I feel that it should 'be a public hearing. I strongly feel that allowing this use would be counter to. the bi-polar concept in effect since 1978. Enclosed is some mate- rial on this matter which I 'd appreciate your reviewing. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, WALTER BROS. CONST. CO. , INC. Evelyn K. Walter Vice President EKW:pao RECEIVED NOV 29 10 crfycLm 5:00P • 1 � a�.v✓x�c. ORDINANCE NO. 1104 (1987 Series) AN OltU1NANCL OF TIfE CITY 01: SAN LUIS 0111SPO APPROVING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PD 1328 (265-285 SOUTH STREET, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONE MAP FROM C-S TO C-S-PD WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have held public hearings to consider amending the zoning regulations in accordance with Section 65800 et. scq. of the Government Code, and Chapter 17.62 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed zoning is consistent with general Wan; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning will not have a significant affect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as 1'olloWs: SECTION 1. That the area shown on the maps attached hereto marked Exhibit 'A' and included herein by reference be reclassified from C-S (Scrvicc-Commcrcial) to C-S-PD (Service-Commcrcial-Planned Development). SECTION 2. That the preliminary developmc-jt plan (PD 1328) is hereby approved subject to the findings and conditions: Findings I. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential areas. 3. The project will provide adequate mitigation to address potential impacts related to noise, light and glare, and loss of privacy, among others, imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas, by using methods such as setbacks, landscaping, bcrming, and fencing. 4. The projcct docs not preclude industrial or Scrvicc commercial uses in areas especially suited for such uses when compared with offices. 5. The project does not create a shortage of S and M zoned land available for service commercial or -industrial development. Ordinance No. it o4 (1987 Series) PD 1328 Page 2 Conditions: I. A maximum of 18,000 gross square feet of floor space in the existing buildings on the site may be occupied by professional office uses. 2. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all Zoning Regulations for the C-S zone shall apply. I More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single tenant may occupy less than 2500 square feet of adjacent, interconnected floor area. 4. The following types of office-relate banks, real estate offices, financial institutions � , medical clinics, doctors offices, and lawyers offices. 5. Professional offices shall be limited to the locations shown on the approved site and floor plans. Revisions to the location of office uses may be made, subject to approval of an administrative use permit, and with the written approval of an owners' association representing owners of all underlying lots. CC&R's creating the owners' association shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to occupancy by the professional office uses. Alternatively, the underlying lots may be combined to one parcel. 6. The following uses which are otherwise permitted in the C-S zone are prohibited in this PD: Ambulance services Animal hospitals and boarding Bars, taverns, ctc. Bus stations Cabinet and carpentry shops Contractor's yards Government agency Laundry/dry cleaning Service stations Tire recapping Trailer rental Trucking/taxi service Utility companies Corporation yards 7. The following uses which arc otherwise permitted in the C-S zone arc only allowed in this PD subject to approval by an administrative use permit: Auto repair and related services Building and landscape maintenance services Carwash - self-scrvicc Equipment rental Exterminators and fumigators Feed stores and farm supply sales Printing and publishing Ord inanee No. 1104 (1987 Series) PD 1328 Page 3 Repair services Retail sales - building and landscape materials Retail sales and rental - autos, trucks, motorcycles, RV's Retail sales - auto parts and accessories Retail sales - tires and batteries Retail sales and rentals - boats, aircraft, mobile homes Warehousing, ministorage, moving company Wholesale and mailorder houses 8. No parking space, driveway, or backup aisle shall be obstructed by loading or unloading of trucks between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Saturday. SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said city, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its said final passage. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any interested member of the public. INTRODUCED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, at its meeting held on the Ist day of December , 1987, on motion of Councileewber Settle , seconded by Councileember Reiss , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council embers Settle. Reiss. Pinard. Rappa. and Mayor Dun in NOES: Mone ABSENT: Mone 0000 iL Mayor Ron Dunin ATTEST: City Clerk Pam Voges Ordinance No. t t o,<1987 Series) PD 1328 Page 4 APPROVED: City Ad inistrativc Officcr City At rney Community Development Director C� y Ofam t san Wis VE)OP OOMMUNfTY DEVELOPMENT DEPARNENT•900 PALM SWET Past oBbs Box 321 •San Luis ObhOo.G 934080321 •WU541.1000 January 9, 1984 ` Jack tt ftra 'n<. Off ica of Space Management 915 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Mr. Miura, I've been aware for some time of the problems your agency has had in finding space for your EDD group in our city, and I wanted to cO=V=i- cate to you our city's interests in assisting you in locating their - offices or those of any other State offices into areas of our City that are properly zoned. Thus, it's good to hear that your agency is now looking to the structure at 3220 South Higuera Street, in that the property is properly zoned and the building itself was originally approved by the city and constructed for the purpose of housing public agency offices. Since 1978, when the city approved the rezoning of this property, it has been the city policy to encourage use of the building by public agencies. Although the conditions of Use Permits on this property have changed to allow some private agency clients, it is clear that our city prefers that the structure continue to have public agency tenants as its priority use. As such, we have discussed the EDD use of the 3220 South Riguera Street building with T. Reith Gurnee of Richmond Rossi Montgomery and Bill Todd of CalTrans and have concluded the following: a) Unlike the Padre Plaza space you have been looking at, the EDD use of the building requires no special use permits. It only requires a Building Permit. b) If RRM and you can get the tenant improvement drawings and Building Permit application by January 16, 1984, we will ex- pedite checking your plans. c) To the extent we can cooperate with you and Mr. Walters. the building owner, to gain the earliest possible occupancy date for EDD, we will do so. • January 9, 1984 Page 2 It has also come to my attention that the State Department of Parks and Beaches as well as the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission may also be looking to relocate from their present location in the CalTrans build- ing. I want to let you know that if this is the case, we will cooperate in reldcating these public agencies to a suitable site with proper zoning in our community. The building at 3220 South Higuera may be suitable for these uses, as well. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the city's posi- tions or procedures regarding this matter. Sincerely, Toby Ross, Community Development Director Citv of San Luis Obispo, California TR:vu cc:T. Keith Gurnee n Wa to Bill Todd, CalTrans Jack Ramsey, Space Planning Groun '��� /00V/0� R R k.1 0 1 R C P August 5, 1988 RECEIVED Mr. Mike Multari AU6 5 SM Community Development Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: 3030 South Higuera Street Dear Mr. Multari: With the enclosed application forms and exhibits we wish to apply for a Conditional Use Permit, a Lot Line Adjustment. and an Architectural Review approval for a new office building to be constructed on the campus of the South Higuera Social Services complex. The building, just under 17,000 sq. ft. , would be a two-level structure devoted to State offices. Negotiations will shortly be concluded between Don Walters (as the design/builder) and the following users who would occupy the building: 1. Caltrans R.O.W. Division: 7,700 net sq. ft. (The entire second level of the building) 2. California Department of Rehabilitation: 3,300 net sq. ft. (the first level of the structure facing South Higuera Street) 3. One or more of the following: 3,300 net sq. ft. District Attorney Family Support Unit Department of Corrections U.S. Immigration Service State Compensation Insurance Fund A lease for the Department of Rehabilitation has already been executed. Other leases are drafted and awaiting final approval by either the State of California or the County of San Luis Obispo. The attached site plan shows how this two story structure would be nestled onto a currently vacant portion of the site. The lot line near the corner of the parking structure must be adjusted to accommodate the new building. The construction of a new parking lot on South Higuera frontage of the property, coupled with a restriping Mr. Mike Multari Page 2 August 5. 1988 of the existing lot and an access connection of this parking lot to the parking structure, a total of 61 parking spaces have been provided for this 17,000 sq. ft. building. A total of 57 new spaces are required by the City Zoning Regulations. This building is being proposed in response to the burgeoning demand for office space by government agencies. All agencies interested in the building have expressed their urgent need for this space which they want to be constructed and provided to them at the earliest possible date. As such, we are hoping that the processing of our applications will be smooth and timely. If you have any questions regarding the building. the uses proposed to go in it, or any other aspects of this application. please don't hesitate to give me a call. Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, RRM DESIGN GROUP 04 T. Keith Gurnee Senior Vice Pref dent Division Enclosure A10/KG-S0-HIG city of sAn luis oBispo M Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 •San Luis Obispo,CA 93103.8100 November 16, 1988 P.O. xWalters wA`'E8 8�os, San Luis Obispo. CA 93406 NOV 18 1988 8 oft" 4,if SUBJECT: ARC 88-127: 3230 South Higuera Streets t it New office building Dear Mr. Walters: At its November 7, 1988 regular meeting, the Architectural Review Commission granted final approval to the above project with colors and landscaping including pedestrian walks to return to the commission for approval. Minutes of this meeting will be sent to you as soon as they are available. Architectural Review Commission approval expires after one year if construction has not started, unless the commission designated a different time period. On request, the Community Development Director may grant an extension of up to one year, but not greater than two years beyond the original date of ARC approval. The decision of the commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within ten calendar days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision of the commission. Surplus plans for this project may be picked up at the Community Development Department. Plans not claimed within 30 days will be discarded. If you have any questions, please contact Greg Smith at 549-7174. Sincerely, Ken Bruce, Senior Planner Community Development cc: RRM Design Group ds/fII 1-16let city o san l�uis oally 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo.CA 93109-8100 November 3, 1988 a'At Mr. Don Walter ��,�� 1 1988 P.O. Box 809 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 SUBJECT: Use Permit U1401 3230 S. Higuera Street Dear Mr. Walter: The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting of October 26, 1988" approved your request to allow a new office building at the above address. Approval is based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed"on the attached resolution. If the use or structure authorized by this use permit is not established within one year of the date of approval or such longer time as may be stipulated as a condition of approval, the use permit shall expire. 'See Municipal Code Section 17.58.070.D. , for possible renewal. The decision of the commission is final unless appealed to the City Clerk within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by a decision of the commission. If you have any questions, please contact Greg Smith at 549-7174 . Sincerely, Michael Multari, Director Community Development Attachment: Resolution No. 4057-88 CC: RRM Design Group WA f.ovi , 'Q38 . SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4057-88 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct a public hearing in the City Council Chambers of the San Luis Obispo City Hall, San Luis Obispo, California on October 26, 1988, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application No. U1401 by Don Walter, applicant. USE PERMIT REQUESTED: To allow a new office building. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: On file in the office of Community Development, City Hall. GENERAL LOCATION: 3230 S. Higuera Street GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT: Office, Neighborhood-Commercial PRESENT ZONE: O-S, C-N WHEREAS, said commission as a result of its inspections, investigations and studies made by itself, and in behalf and of testimonies offered at said hearing, has established existence of the following circumstances: 1 . The proposed use will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of persons residing or working on the site or in the vicinity. 2 . The use is appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3 . The proposed use conforms to the general plan and meets zoning ordinance requirements. c ; y 40 Resolution No. 4057-88 Use Permit U1401 Page 2 4 . The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has granted a negative declaration subject to mitigation measures noted in Condition 7 below. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application No. U1401 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Use of proposed building shall be limited to the offices of government human services agencies dealing directly with the general public. Exceptions may be approved by the Community Development Director for semi-public or non-profit private human services agencies. Exceptions for non-human services agencies and businesses may be allowed subject to approval of an administrative use permit. 2 . Applicant shall dedicate a creek maintenance and pedestrian access easement over that portion of the site within the San Luis Creek channel, and including a 20-foot buffer strip at the top of bank on both sides of the creek. 3. Applicant shall record a common access driveway and shared parking easement agreement, to the approval of the Community Development Director. 4 . A minimum of 48 additional parking spaces shall be provided on the site. 5. Applicant shall install a sheltered bus stop on the site, or on adjacent property owned by the applicant, to the approval of the Transit coordinator and Community Development Director. 7. Applicant shall provide a landscaped buffer strip at least twenty feet in width between the top of creek bank and the developed area of the site, to the approval of the Community Development Director and Architectural Review Commission. The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo, upon the motion of Commr. Crotser, seconded by Commr.. Hainline, and upon the following roll call vote: AYES: Crotser, Hainline, Roalman, Kourakis NOES: Gerety ABSENT: Schmidt, Duerk Michael Multari , Secretary Planning Commission DATED: October 26, 1988 1 MEETItk AGROA ei / DH(E %C 6 ea ITEM # R R \1 I) I ti I l; N C R ( L' 1' r i 1 r U::,,i•.;anon br Lead Persor, ^. November 29, 1988 L77r Mr. John Dunn City Administrator City of San Luis ObispoP.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 Subject: Location of Government Agency Uses in the Westlands PD Complex Dear Mr. Dunn: On behalf of Don Walter, my client, and owner of the South Higuera Government Services Center, we must raise his sincere and serious concerns regarding the location of "government agency" uses in a C-S-PD District at 265 South Street in San Luis Obispo. The proposal by the Westlands P.D. to locate a CALTRANS function in their complex is clearly inconsistent with the PD-Zoning Ordinance (Ord. 1104-1987 Series) covering their property. Condition #6 of that ordinance expressly prohibits "government agency" uses on the property. But perhaps more significantly, the proposal directly conflicts with the policy contained in the City's General Plan guiding the location of government uses into certain specified areas in the City. Ironically, on October 26, 1988, the Planning Commission approved Use Permit U-1401 allowing a new office building on Mr. Walter's property at 3230 South Higuera Street that would contain these very same offices of CALTRANS. Also, on November 21 , 1988, the ARC granted final ARC approval for this same building under application ARC-88-127. After all this, we are frankly flat surprised that this new Westwinds proposal would be scheduled as a consent item when it poses so many questions of procedure and conflict with a long-standing body of public policy. If indeed it is the staff's intention to allow government uses to start proliferating in scattered locations around the city, we must request that this item be pulled for consideration in the City's upcoming General Plan update. At minimum, such a request that conflicts with its own zoning should be scheduled for a later hearing as a formal amendment to the Planned Development Ordinance currently RECEIVED NOV 2 � 1ft CITYCLERK SAN LUISn4C70.CA r Mr. John Dunn November 29, 1988 Page 2 affecting the property. However, we would hope (after reviewing this letter and re-examining public policies on location of government uses) the city would simply reject this item out of hand. My client's reasons for raising this issue are many, but they center around the restrictions of his property limiting it purely to government uses. What Mr. Walter has gone through over the past 10 years since the city solicited him to build this complex has not been easy. Now, he is most concerned that the city would relax its locational criteria for government agencies just when this center has started to work. In support of our argument to pull this item, we offer the following: (1) Staff has seemed to seize upon the "engineering" rather than the "government agency" nature of the use for the CALTRANS Right-of-way Department. Would the staff call the City Engineering Department an "engineering" use and allow it to locate in some other service commercial center, or let the County Engineering Department locate in the South Broad area? We think not. Such an interpretation of use could open the door to the notion of scattering "government agency" around town and damage the strong locational policies for government uses contained in the General Plan. (2) Even if the City were to buy the notion that the CALTRANS R.O.W. Division was an "engineering" use, the CALTRANS Right-of-Way Division could hardly be described as truly an "engineering" use. This Division of CALTRANS could just as easily be viewed as a use concentration on real estate transactions, right-of-way acquisitions, real estate appraisals, etc, thus placing it more in the "Accounting, Real Estate, Appraisal " realm of uses that also happen to be prohibited in this complex. f Mr. John Dunn November 29, 1988 Page 3 (3) Ordinance 1104 approving the Planned Development Rezoning was approved with the explicit inclusion -- at the insistence of the City Council -- prohibiting "government agency" uses in the complex. As such, this proposal is in direct violation of that ordinance and should either be rejected out of hand or deferred until such time as an application to amend the Planned Development can be filed with the city. To conclude, we trust my client' s position is pretty clear. If you need any further clarification of our position on this matter please don' t hesitate to give me a call . Sincerely, RRM DESIGN GROUP T. Keith Gurnee Senior Vice Pr ident Planning Divi ion A17/KG-Dunn 4, W &A' R ;2 : A. k.5,Q N Posy Office Boz 1796•S Age9Karp� iA*4rAfts9B(5)544-2013 December 2, 1988 Respond by: MEET( ti— AGEN nGl DATE _OEC 98 [1?6AO ITEM Mr. Mike Multari Rtq Atty. 24 City Hall 9 Clerk-orig. P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-8100 Mr. Gurnee's letter of 11/29/88 might confuse the issue of interpreting Ordinance 1104 to allow a right of way field office, in Westwind Business Park. The thrust of his argument is that such an interpretation conflicts with the general plan poli'cy regarding government office location. Nothing could be further from the truth. The general plan policy does not give Walter Center a monopoly on ALL government agencies. Walter Center has been granted what could be termed a monopoly on "OFFICES OF GOVERNMENT HUMAN SERVICES AGENCIES DEALING DIRECTLY WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC" in that it is restricted to such agencies and as yet no other location has been approved for such agencies. Because of this restriction LOCATING CALTRANS AT WALTER CENTER WILL REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT. The requested interpretation does not weaken the bipolar strategy. If Caltrans, a technical service agency, were located in Westwind as opposed to Walter Center, it would allow more space for human service agencies at Walter Center. Otherwise, if Caltrans fills Walter Center, human service will again be scattered thus working against the bipolar strategy. LOCATING THE CALTRANS RIGHT OF WAY OFFICE AT WESTWIND IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE BIPOLAR STRATEGY THAN LOCATING IT AT WALTER CENTER. There may be an additional ISSUE OF PUBLIC POLICY involved here as well. When the space needs of human service agencies was less than the space available in the Walter Center, rental rates were held in check. The general plan policies and use permit restrictions on the Walter Center worked. When the demand exceeds supply, if it hasn't already, the policy and restrictions will work to increase rental rates for these agencies. This cannot be considered to be in the public interest. The interpretation requested would not force Caltrans to Westwind. It would simply ALLOW WESTWIND TO COMPETE WITH THE WALTER CENTER to provide the best and most economical solution for Caltrans space needs. WESTWIND IS AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES AGENCIES like a Caltrans field office. WESTWIND IS MUCH CLOSER TO CALTRANS' EXISTING FACILITY. Locating Caltrans at Westwind would "FREE UP" MORE SPACE FOR GOVERNMENT HUMAN SERVICE AGENCIES DEALING DIRECTLY WITH THE PUBLIC in the Walter Center. The requested interpretation is REASONABLE, IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND CLEARLY CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN (Sections 17.22.010 & 17.62.040 as amended by GP/CR 1229 in -Ordinance 1087 - February, 1987). To allow the efforts of competing entrepreneurs to convert a simple interpretation in to lengthy public process would not be in the public's best interest. Given Mssrs. Walters & Gurnee strenuous objection referral of the issue to the Planning Commission or to the Community Development Director for an administrative use permit would only delay an issue which the city council will probably have to decide. Thank you for your help in this matter. I had no idea when I made the request that it would trigger such a reaction by Don & Keith. Sincerely, RECEIVED WIM J6)D. French OTYCLERK CC. CAO; City Council Members SANLWS086PO.CA