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