HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/17/1995, 4A & 4B - 1. (ANNX/)R 110-93: PREZONING TO LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO ALLOW ANNEXATION OF A 14-ACRE PARCEL ADJACENT TO THE CITY LIMITS; AND 2. SP 154-94: TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE EDNA-ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN, TO MAKE ANNEXATION POLICIES CONSISTENT WI41�IN1�N ICI t� N!
�I�I„�pRlu
city Of San I S OBiSPO REM NUMBER•
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT A$,8
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
BY: Judith Lautner, ssociate Planner
SUBJECT: 1. (Anna /)R 110 -93: Prezoning to Low- Density Residential to allow
annexation of a 14 -acre parcel adjacent to the city limits;
and
2. SP 154 -94: Text amendment to the Edna -Islay Specific Plan, to make
annexation policies consistent with those in the Land Use Element.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
A. Indicate support for the proposed annexation;
B. Introduce an ordinance concurring with the negative declaration of environmental impact
and amending the zoning map from "Low- Density Residential" (County zoning) to Low -
Density Residential, with a specific plan overlay (R- 1 -SP), based on findings contained
in this report;
and
C. Adopt a resolution changing the Edna -Islay Specific Plan text to make annexation policies
consistent with those in the Land Use Element, based on findings contained in this
report;
as recommended by the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION
Back and
The applicant wants to develop his property, which is within the "secondary planning area" of
the Edna -Islay Specific Plan area. The property is currently in the county, zoned for low- density
residential uses. Because of the need for services, the applicant prefers to develop the property
within the city. Therefore, he has applied for a prezoning and annexation of the site.
Staff found some inconsistencies between the recently- adopted General Plan Land Use Element
(LUE) and the Edna -Islay Specific Plan (EISP) policies on annexations. Staff therefore initiated
an amendment to the specific plan to correct ,these inconsistencies.
This report only reviews issues not discussed in the PC report, and reports the action taken by
the Planning commission. See the attached Planning Commission report for a detailed
explanation and evaluation of the requests.
4 -1
city of San WI S OBI Sp0
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
4380 Broad Street,
Secondary Planning Area of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan area
Page 2
The Planning Commission (PC) reviewed the requests on November 30, 1994, and
recommended approval of both requests. As part of its action, the Commission amended the
initial study to include a mitigation measure requiring emergency access to Fuller Road. This
amendment is incorporated into the attached initial study.
Roy Garcia, owner of parcel "B" on EISP figure 8 (attached), was present at the meeting and
said he would not object to inclusion of his parcel into the annexation, if the Council so directs.
Staff has not heard from owners of other parcels in the secondary planning area.
Evaluation
1. Secondary planning area intent will be met. The specific plan says that "it is the intent
of the plan to encourage land uses in adjacent county areas which are compatible with
those planned inside the city...." A circulation and land use plan for the secondary
planning area is therefore included in the EISP (see attached figures 27 and 28). The
specific plan further states:
ftpfM development standards: Property development standards spelled out in other
parts of this report should generally apply within the secondary planning area. This
includes provisions for land use buffers between commercial and residential areas.
This means that all specific plan standards are to apply to the land use plan in Figures
27 and 28.
The map in figure 27 shows that the site is to contain an extension of a residential street
(Goldenrod) and a creek with a bicycle/pedestrian path alongside it. The preliminary
plans for the site (see packet) show the Goldenrod extension in essentially the same
configuration as the specific plan. The letter from John French (attached) says (in part):
"We are willing to offer for dedication to the public a 20 foot wide right -of -way for a
bike and pedestrian crossing of our property so that a link can ultimately be made
between Broad Street and the Clover Creek development."
and
"We are willing to dedicate to the public an open space easement over the entire creek
area of our property."
The map and these statements indicate that specific plan standards can and will be met
when a subdivision plan is submitted. Details of the subdivision have not been submitted
yet because the annexation has not been approved.
1111101111111 city of San LaIS OBISpo
o_CIL AGENDA REPORT
4380 Broad Street,
Secondary Planning Area of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan area
Page 3
2. Emergency access road recommended. As noted in the attached report, the Fire
Department is not requiring emergency access to Fuller Road. However, the Planning
Commission felt this additional safeguard is appropriate, given that the remainder of the
secondary planning area may not be annexed for a long time. The applicant intends to
develop only the property south of the creek area until full access is available from Fuller
Road.
3. Services can be provided. As noted in the attached report, water and sewer services
can be provided (if the applicant retrofits plumbing fixtures within the city). The
applicant has also indicated a willingness to waive protest rights to formation of an
assessment district for area -wide transportation improvements associated with the
annexation of the Airport Area (of which the site is a part). An avigation easement may
be required at the time of subdivision.
4. Findings can be made. A prezoning may be approved if it is found to be consistent
with the general plan and if no significant environmental impacts are likely to result from
it. These findings can be made. The prezoning approval should be based on the
following
Findings:
1. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map
and text, because a) Low- Density Residential zoning is consistent with the Low -
Density Residential land use designation on the LUE map, and b) prezoning and
annexation of the site is consistent with LUE policies on annexation.
2. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration
adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the
proposed rezoning, and reflects the independent judgement of the City Council.
The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and incorporates the
mitigation measures recommended in the initial study, as amended by the
Planning Commission to include a requirement for emergency access to Fuller
Road, into the project;
An amendment to a specific plan text can be made if it is consistent with the general plan
and will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. The text amendment
approval should be based on the following
City Of San WIS OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
4380 Broad Street,
Secondary Planning Area of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan area
Page 4
Findings:
1. The text amendment is consistent with the General Plan, because it will result in
consistency between the two documents.
2. An initial study of environmental impacts was prepared by the Community
Development Department on December 8, 1994, that describes potential
significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The
Community Development Director has reviewed the environmental initial study
and granted a Negative Declaration of environmental impact. The initial study
concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment and the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration and
finds that it reflects the independent judgement of the City Council;
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may approve the prezoning and text amendment with changes to the mitigation
measures or to the wording of the text.
The Council may continue action, if more information is wanted. Direction should be given to
the applicants and staff.
The Council may deny the request, if findings are made to support a denial.
Attached:
fanning Commission report and attachments
resolutions
Draft ordinance
Planning Commission minutes: November 30, 1994 (forthcoming)
EISP excerpt: Land use and circulation policies for the Secondary Planning Area
EISP excerpt: Figures 27 & 28 of the EISP
6
RESOLUTION NO. (1995 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EDNA -ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN
TO ACHIEVE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE SPECIFIC PLAN
AND THE 1994 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
ANNEXATION POLICIES
(SP 154 -94)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after consideration of public testimony,
the specific plan amendment request SP 154 -94, the Planning Commission's recommendations,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following findings:
1. The text amendment is consistent with the General Plan, because it will result in
consistency between the two documents.
2. An initial study of environmental impacts was prepared by the Community Development
Department on December 8, 1994, that describes potential significant environmental
impacts associated with project development. The Community Development Director has
reviewed the environmental initial study and granted a Negative Declaration of
environmental impacx. The initial study concludes that the project will not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment and the City Council hereby adopts the
Negative Declaration and finds that it reflects the independent judgement of the City
Council.
1
SECTION 2. A=zml., The specific plan amendment SP 154 -94, as shown on
Exhibit A, attached, is hereby approved.
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 , 1995.
4 -5
Resolution no. (1995 Series)
SP 154 -94
Edna -Islay Secondary Planning Area
- .-,Page,, 2.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
KINJ:ZOI%
+-(o
0
Amendment to Edna -Islay Specific Plan page 51:
Section:
Land Use and Circulation
Secondary Planning Area
Proposed land use policies
Annexation: Adequate .. ••a._: a ��4. 1 j be L. the a i. assured ����
he:fere tMe area ehe.a4d be-ee eAder-ed €e= aanematimr- Any
future annexation requests should be consistent with this
specific plan, the city's general plan.. and subsequent growth
mana ement ";"" °""
EXHIBIT A
1
RESOLUTION NO. (1995 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN EDNA -ISLAY SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT
FOR THE SECONDARY PLANNING AREA (SP 154 -94)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this council, after
consideration of public testimony, the specific plan text amendment
application SP 154 -94, the Planning Commissions recommendations,
staff recommendations and reports thereon, makes the following
finding:
1. The text amendment is inconsistent with general plan
policies; specifically: (list)
SECTION 2. The request for an amendment to change the
annexation policies in the Edna -Islay Specific Plan is hereby
denied.
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
, 1995.
i
Resolution
SP 154 -94
..Edna -Islay
page: 2.. .
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
no.
(1995 Series)
Secondary Planning Area
City Attorney
IN
ORDINANCE NO. (1995 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS MAP TO DESIGNATE
A 14 -ACRE SITE ADJACENT TO THE WESTERLY END OF GOLDENROD
LOW - DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH A SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAY (R- 1 -SP),
CONTINGENT UPON FINAL APPROVAL OF ANNEXATION OF THE SITE
(R 110 -93)
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a hearing to consider
the prezoning request R 110 -93; and
WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings;
Findings:
1. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use
Element (LUE) map and text, because a) Low- Density Residential
zoning is consistent with the Low - Density Residential land use
designation on the LUE map, and b) prezoning and annexation of
the site is consistent with LUE policies on annexation.
2. The City Council finds and determines that the project's
Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential
significant environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning,
and reflects the independent judgement of the City Council.
The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and
incorporates the mitigation measures recommended in the
initial study, as amended by the Planning Commission to
include a requirement for emergency access to Fuller Road,
into the project.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The Zoning map amendment R 110 -93 is hereby
approved.
SECTION 2. This ordinance, together with the names of
councilmembers voting for and against, shall be published once in
full, at least (3) days prior to its final passage, in the
Telegram- Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this
city. This ordinance shall go into effect upon final approval of
annexation of the site.
4 -10
Ordinance No. (1995 Series)
R 110 -93
4380 Broad Street
Page 2
INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of
1995, on motion of , seconded
by , and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Attorney
Mayor
4-1(
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEMS # 1 & 2
BY: Judith LautnerTssociate Planner MEETING DATE: November 30, 1994
FILE NUMBERS: Annx and R 110 -93, SP 154 -94
PROJECT ADDRESSES: 1) 4380 Broad Street; and 2) The Secondary Planning Area of the
Edna -Islay Specific Plan
SUBJECT: 1. Annx /R 110 -93: Prezoning to Low- Density Residential and annexation of a 14 -acre
parcel adjacent to the city limits;
and
2. SP 154 -94: Text amendment to the Edna -Islay Specific Plan, to make annexation
policies consistent with those in the Land Use Element
RECD NIMENDATION
Recommend approval of the prezoning and text amendment to the City Council, based on the following
findings:
Prezoning:
1. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element map and text, as discussed in
section 1 of this report.
2. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses
the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning, and reflects the
independent judgement of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration
and incorporates the mitigation measures recommended in the initial study into the project.
Text amendment: _
1. The amendment to the text of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan,
because it will result in consistency between the two documents.
BACKGROUND
Sifimflon
The applicant wants to develop his property, which is within the "secondary planning area" of the Edna-
Islay Specific Plan area. The Edna -Islay Specific Plan (EI$P), adopted in 1982, includes two areas:
the 339 -acre "primary planning area ", which is currently within the city limits, and a 109 -acre area,
the "secondary planning area ", which was outside the city limits in 1982. Since that time, a portion
of the secondary planning area (approximately 19 acres), the area bounded by Tank Farm Road, Broad
Street, and Industrial Way, was annexed to the city as part of the Broad Street Annexation. A shopping
center has been approved for that site.
The applicant's parcel is below Fuller Road, adjacent to the city limits and accessible from the westerly
end of Goldenrod Lane. The parcel may be developed within current residential County zoning or it
4 —/4oQ
Annx /R 110 -93
SP 154 -94
Page 2
may be annexed to the city and developed in accordance with specific plan provisions. Because of the
need for services, the applicant wants the property to be annexed to the city.
In reviewing the proposal, staff noted that the annexation policies in the EISP were not consistent with
the recently - adopted Land Use Element in one respect. Because specific plans are further refinements
of general plans,. the two documents must be consistent. Therefore, staff initiated an amendment to the
specific plan to correct the inconsistency.
If the annexation is approved, the applicant will need to submit an application to the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCo) for approval. If LAFCo approves the annexation, it will be forwarded
to the City Council for final action. When the annexation is effective, the City zoning map will be
changed to include the prezoned designation.
Data Summary
Subject:
Address:
Applicant/property owner:
Representative:
Zoning:
General Plan:
Environmental status:
Project action deadline:
Site description
Prezoning
4380 Broad Street
Charles French
Tierra Engineering
County low- density
residential (R -1)
Low- Density Residential
Negative Declaration, with
mitigation, approved by the
Director on November 18,
1994
No State - mandated deadline
for legislative actions
Text amendment
No specific address
(secondary planning area)
City of San Luis Obispo
Judy Lautner, Associate
Planner
County residential and retail
and service commercial zones
Low- and Medium - Density
Residential, Services and
Manufacturing
Negative declaration
approved by the Director
November 18, 1994
Same
1. The triangular- shaped parcel contains approximately fourteen acres, is vacant, and is adjacent to the
existing city limits on the northeast. The parcel, more particularly described as lot 109 of the Suburban
Tract, touches Fuller Road, a private street that becomes public within the City Limits, and is about
1,150 feet east of the Broad Street right -of -way. The site is vacant, divided by a creek and bordered
on the south by another branch of the same creek. Existing vegetation primarily lies along these two
intermittent waterways. The property is relatively flat (slopes at less than 2% towards Fuller Road),
except for the creek beds and a detention basin, next to the city limit line, created to serve the existing
Edna -Islay development. *—/-9
Annx /R 110 -93
SP 154 -94
Page 3
2. The remaining 90 acres of the secondary planning area would be affected by the text amendment.
Eroiect Description
1. This project is the annexation and prezoning of a 14 -acre parcel. The prezoning would provide a
zoning designation that is consistent with the Land Use Element map, and the annexation would
attach the parcel to the city. No development proposal would be approved by these actions, nor
would City services be automatically available.
2. The text amendment project is an amendment to the Edna -Islay Specific Plan text to make it
consistent with annexation policies in the Land Use Element (LUE):
(12a�t indicates additional wording, �s indicate text to be deleted):
Annexation:
for -ter— Any future annexation requests should be consistent with this speck plan, the
........................
city's general plan, and subsequent growth management programs.
The amendment will clear up the inconsistency and allow annexations within the Edna -Islay
secondary planning area to be processed in accordance with procedures for all other annexations to
the city.
EVALUATION
1. The annexation request is consistent with Land Use Element policies. As spelled out in the
environmental initial study, the recently- adopted Land Use Element (LUE) says that annexations
may occur prior to development, and even before water is available for development. The area
proposed for annexation is designated "Low- Density Residential" on the LUE map, so the proposal
to annex it and prezone it to Low- Density Residential (R -1) is consistent with the map as well. See
the attached inital study for a more detailed discussion of General Plan conformance.
2. But it may be inconsistent with the Edna -Islay Specific Plan. The EISP says that Adequate water
supply will be assured by the city before this area should be considered for annexation. Water is
available through retrofitting of plumbing fixtures, up to a maximum of 33 acre -feet for minor
annexations, according to the City's Urban Water Management Plan (see discussion in the initial
study, attached). It appears that this annexation, together with the TK annexation, would use, but
not exceed, that 33 acre -feet. Any annexations to be considered after the 33 acre -feet are allocated
would be required to secure water through other means, such as wells or new sources.
The water for this property is therefore not technically secured, although it will likely be available.
Because the specific plan annexation policies should be consistent with the LUE's, staff has initiated
a text amendment (part two of this item) to change the wording. The text amendment is being
considered concurrently with the annexation request. Approval of the text amendment will
automatically eliminate any inconsistency between the specific and general plan annexation policies,
and consequently any inconsistency in the annexation request.
3. Findings required. To approve the prezoning, the Planning Commission and Council must find
that it is consistent with the General Plan, and that no significant environmental impacts are expected I4
Annx /R 110 -93 -
SP 154 -94
Page 4
to result from the prezoning. The proposed prezoning to Low- Density Residential is consistent with
the LUE designation of Low- Density Residential. The attached initial study concludes that, as
mitigated, no harm should come to the environment from this prezoning and ultimate annexation.
To approve the amendment to the specific plan, the Planning Commission and Council must find
that it is consistent with the General Plan. The intent of the amendment is to assure this
consistency. Therefore, this finding can also be made.
4. The annexation would involve a small part. of the secondary planning area. The secondary
planning area includes all of the land between Broad Street and the primary planning area. The
specific plan includes a plan for orderly development of the entire area, including a network of
residential streets (see Excerpt A from the EISP, attached).
The land use and circulation plans for the secondary planning area serve as the City's
recommendation to the County on how the area should be developed. City and County zoning of
the area are similar, and would allow development of the entire area virtually as designed in the
specific plan. Such development would be possible only with sufficient water and sewer services,
however. Because the specific plan is a recommendation to the County, and not its own plan, the
County may approve other development plans that do not coincide with the City's.
5. The circulation plan may never be completed. The initial study includes a discussion of the
potential for creation of a long dead -end street (Goldenrod) that does not ultimately connect with
any other street system. The initial study recommends that the City Council review the following
options to address concerns with this potential:
*
ARprove the annexation, but do not allow development until sufficient adjacent land is annexed
as well.
Comment: One way to assure this condition is to expand the EISP text amendment to.driclude a
prohibition of development of this area until sufficient land is annexed to assure a complete
circulation loop.
*
Apgroy e an annexation of a larger area, including adjacent land sufficient to complete the
circulation pattern in the EISP.
Comment. Annexation of two adjacent parcels (see Excerpt B from the EISP, attached) would be
sufficient. See discussion in section 6, below, on the process.
* Aorove the annexation, allowing development as proposed, with a turnaround, finding that the
risk of creating a long no- access street is minimal in this location.
Comment. This alternative satisfies the Fire Department and is acceptable, although not preferable,
to the Utilities Department.
* Approy e the annexation, with a condition that secondary emergency access be provided as
suggested by the applicants.
4-15
Annx /R 110 -93
SP 154 -94
Page 5
Comment. This alternative would provide an extra degree of safety in case of an emergency
affecting the intersection of Goldenrod with Poinsettia Street. It appears to be feasible with
development of a bridge and creation of an all- weather surface from Fuller Road, which is already
accessible by Fire Department equipment. This requirement could be added to the environmental
mitigation measures.
* Dnv the annexation, finding that it is inconsistent with City policies, specifically subdivision
design standards.
Comment: A denial should have clear findings, making it easier for applicants to resubmit with
plans that may be acceptable in the future.
6. The Council could initiate annexation of a larger area. Because of the uncertainties in developing
a plan both within and outside of the city limits, the Council may feel the best course of action to
be the annexation of a larger portion or the entire remainder of the secondary planning area (90
acres) rather than the one parcel. If the Council chooses such a route, the application would be
amended, further environmental studies would be undertaken, and the revised annexation request
would return to the Planning Commission.
If the Planning Commission supports this alternative, staff recommends annexation of the two
parcels west of the site (A and B on the attached Excerpt B). This alternative would allow
completion of the street system with the involvement of the fewest landowners, allowing the process
to be completed relatively quickly. If the additional parcels are to be annexed, some method for
portioning the available water supply to the three parcels will be necessary. The additional
environmental study would need to address this situation.
7. This begins the process. If the City Council is in favor of the annexation, then it will approve the
prezoning and the specific plan text a mendment. (The prezoning will become effective when the
annexation is effective.) The applicant will then make application to the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCo) for annexation. LAFCo will hold a hearing on the request and either approve
or deny it, and will refer the request to the City Council for final action. State law requires the City
to approve uninhabited annexations authorized by LAFCo. If the City does not take an action within
required time limits, the Board of Supervisors is empowered to act in its stead.
If the City Council votes to include additional property in the annexation, then it must pass a
resolution of intention to annex. From this point on, the City becomes the applicant and carries the
process through LAFCo.
The Commission may recommend approval of a modified annexation area, with appropriate prezoning.
The Commission may deny the prezoning and the specific plan amendment. The City Council would
not be required to act on a denial, unless appealed.
The Commission may continue action. Direction should be given to staff and the applicant.
44(o
Annx /R 110 -93
SP 154 -94
Page 6
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Comtpents by Fire and Utilities are discussed above. Other departments had no concerns with the
request.
Attached:
vicinity map
environmental initial studies
EISP excerpts:
A: land use and circulation plan, secondary planning area
B: property ownership, secondary planning area
letter from representative (John French) dated March 28, 1994
In commission packet:
Topographic map showing property boundaries and schematic subdivision plan
4 17
v
l \
' TANK k\ FAFM '
/\ o
2
9
O
OV
c
yr.
CITY LIANT \ '
0 FEET 1000 200
VICINITY MAP I ANNX /R 110 -93 NORTH
GOLDENROD LANE Z&
4--19
''I`ili �Id,l
city. of san Us oBispo
INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION 4380 Broad Street APPLICATIOLI&-93
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation and prezoning to R -1 -SP of a 15 -acre triangular site adjacent to the
city limits at the southerly end of Goldenrod Street.
APPLICANT Charles E. French
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
X NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EXPANDED IMOMtW, Af%ciate Planner
X _ MITIGATION INCLUDED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REWRE IR1C 4
PREPARED BY DATE /
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE
mmer6e& loci 'Fine PIa.nnI Corn toh Nov• 30) 14gg
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
II. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS .................... ............................... NONE*
B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH ........... ............................... NONE*
C. LAND USE ... :..................................................................
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION .............. ...............................
E. PUBLIC SERVICES .................................... ...............................
F. UTIUTIES ........................................ ...............................
G. NOISE LEVELS ..................................... ...............................
H. GEOLOGIC & SEISMIC HAZARDS & TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS ................... .
1. AIR OUAUTY AND WIND CONDITIONS ............... ............................... .
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ............... ............................... .
KPLANT LIFE ..............................:.... .................:.............
LANIMAL LIFE ...................................... ...............................
M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL ..................... ...............................
N. AESTHETIC ........................ ...............................
...............
O. ENERGY/RESOURCEUSE ........................... ...............................
P. OTHER ........................................... ...............................
NONE*
NONE*
NONE*
NONE*
NONE*
NONE
NONE
NONE*
NONE*
NONE*
NONE*
NONE
NONE*
NONE=
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WITH MITIGATION
'SEE ATTACHED REPORT 564kS
Environmental Initial Study
ER 110-93
as amended by the Planning Commission November 30, 1994
4380 Broad Street
Goldenrod Annexation
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project is the annexation of a roughly triangular- shaped parcel of approximately fifteen
acres, adjacent to the existing city limits on the northeast. The parcel, more particularly
described as lot 109 of the Suburban Tract, touches Fuller Road, a private street that becomes
public within the City Limits, and is about 1,150 feet east of the Broad Street right -of -way.
The applicants propose to develop the property residentially, and therefore request appropriate
residential prezoning. Preliminary plans show an extension of Goldenrod Lane and 39 single -
family lots. A part of the proposal is an offer to develop seven affordable housing units when
Fuller Road is extended to Broad Street.
The site is vacant, divided by a creek and bordered on the south by another branch of the same
creek. Existing vegetation primarily lies along these two intermittent waterways.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Community plans and goals
* Land use element.
Overall annexation goliM The Land Use Element (LUE) says (section 1.12.2): _
Annexation should be used as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate
urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which
are to be developed wirh urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs.
The City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may
annex areas which are to remain permanently as open space. An area may be annexed
in phases, consistent with the city- approved speck plan or development plan for the
area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflect topography, needed capital
facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed land uses and
roads.
The site is within the Edna -Islay Specific Plan area. The specific plan adopted for the
area does not specify a preferred approach to annexation of this area (see discussion
below, under "Edna -Islay Specific Plan"). Therefore, the LUE policies and programs
prevail. Annexation of the site is consistent with the above policy.
4 -ao
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 2
Availability of services: Section 1. 13.4 of the LUE says that development in an annexed
area can only be approved "when adequate City services can be provided for that
development, without reducing the level of services or increasing the cost of services for
existing development and for build -out within the City Limits as of July 1994, in
accordance with the City's water management policies. " In other words, an area may
be annexed but will still not be able to be developed unless adequate services are
available. (See discussion under "Utilities ", below, for analysis of availability of water
and sewer services, and see "Energy or Resource Use ", below, for discussion of water
availability.) According to the above policies, annexation of the parcel may proceed but
development will be dependent on services being available without affecting the service
to residents within the July 1994 City Limits.
O cnn_space mquirement: Section 1.13.5 says:
Each annexation shall help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open
Space, and for the habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that
are identified in policy 6.1.1. (Policy 6.1.1 says that various types of land will be
designated as open space, including upland and valley sensitive habitats, prime
agricultural soils, greenbelt areas, and other areas not suited to urban development.)
Standards are set for specific areas (not including the Edna -Islay area) and for "other
areas":
1.13.5. F. Other area properties, which are both along the urban reserve line and on
hillsides shall dedicate land or easements for about four times the area to be developed.
The site does not fall within one of the specified areas, nor does it lie "along the urban
reserve line and on hillsides ". Therefore only those areas, within the site itself, that are
designated Open Space are required to be secured as permanent open space. The
applicants propose to dedicate an easement over the creek corridors on the site, consistent
with standards in the Edna -Islay Specific Plan. Therefore, this requirement will be met.
Edna -Islay Specific Plan (EISP)
The Edna -Islay Specific Plan serves as a refinement of General Plan policies and sets
development criteria for the 446 -acre area bounded by Orcutt Road on the east, Broad
Street on the west, Industrial Way, Orcutt Hill and the City Limits on the north, and
Islay Hill, the City Limits and a creek on the south. Of the 446 acres, approximately
339 are within the City Limits, 109 in the county.
The parcel lies in the county area, within the "secondary planning area ". The specific
plan says that the plans for the secondary planning area are the City's official
4-071
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 3
recommendation to the County for what should happen in the secondary planning area.
The specific plan annexation policy says:
Adequate water supply will be assured by the city before this area should be considered
for annexation. Any future annexation requests should be consistent with this specific
plan, the city's general plan, and subsequent growth management programs.
Analysis:
These two documents (LUE and EISP) define the City's policies and goals for the area. The
project meets all of the annexation criteria, except that a water supply may not immediately be
available for development (see further discussion under "Energy or resource use ", below). The
specific plan requirement that "adequate water supply will be assured by the city before this area
should be considered..." appears to conflict with recently- adopted LUE policies, which allow
annexations even when water is not immediately available.
It appears that LUE policies were intended to apply citywide, and not exclude the EISP
secondary planning area. Therefore, an amendment to the specific plan has been initiated to
change the text to be consistent with the LUE. The amendment will be processed concurrently
with the annexation and prezoning requests.
If the specific plan amendment is passed, the inconsistency will be eliminated. If the amendment
is not passed, either 1) the annexation request will be determined to be inconsistent with the
specific plan and denied, or 2) the specific plan language will be determined to be consistent or
ambiguous, and the annexation request may be approved.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Population distribution and growth
The LUE says that
1.11.2 Residential Growth Rate The City's housing supply shall grow no faster than one percent
per year, averaged over a 36 -month period, excluding dwellings affordable to residents with very
low or low incomes as defined in the Housing Element.
The LUE anticipates the addition of 900 dwellings by 1997 over the 1992 total, or an average
of 180 per year. These numbers would meet the one - percent policy.
ftulation increase: The annexation proposal is to allow construction of 46 homes, 39 of them
low -density, and the remaining 7 presumably higher- density (and affordable). According to the
1990 census, an average of 2.39 persons lives in each occupied housing unit in the city. If all
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 4
46 units are occupied, then, a total of 46 X 2.39 persons = 109.94 = 110 persons would be
expected to live in this annexed area. Assuming all 110 migrate to the city to live here, this
increase represents 110/43,704 (1993 population) = 0.25% of the current population, or about
1/4 of the one - percent population increase expected each year during the 1990's.
Population distribution: The new homes would be adjacent to existing housing and in an area
intended for residential use. The type of homes would be similar to those already existing in
the area, and would be at similar densities. There would be no significant change to the
population patterns already existing.
Conclusion: Not significant. The project would not result in significant changes to the
city's population or its distribution.
Land use
The site is currently vacant, and is designated "Low - Density Residential" on the City's Land Use
Element map. The Edna -Islay Specific Plan governs the ultimate development of the area. The
map and text show an extension of Goldenrod in roughly the configuration shown on the
proposed subdivision map, and show the entire area as low- density residential. The subdivision
map indicates low- density residential lots along the street extension, and an explanatory letter
from the applicant includes an offer to build an additional seven low -cost housing units north of
the creek, when Fuller Road is extended to Broad Street.
Typically, lower -cost units are developed at a higher density. than "Low - Density Residential" (R-
1). If these seven units are a higher- density apartment or condominium project, the specific plan
land use designation for that area would need to be changed to a higher- density designation.
Because the total number (seven) is low, staff assumes these units may be developed at a
medium -density intensity.
Is medium -density residential development appropriate in this area? The LUE says this about
the proper locations for medium - density development:
and
Medium - density development is appropriate as a transition from low - density development
to higher densities.
Medium - density residential development, allowing a mazfrnwn of 12 dwelling units per
acre, shall be encouraged in close proximity to neighborhood and community commercial
and public facilities, where utilities, circulation, and neighborhood character can
accommodate such development. Medium - density projects should be designed to be
compatible with neighboring low - density development.
4"a3
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 5
The medium - density area would be close to a commercial office project and to the Marigold
Center, a large neighborhood shopping center approved for the northeast corner of Tank Farm
Road and Broad Street. Design review can assure compatibility with neighboring low- density
development. A change to Medium - density residential, for a small part of the area, appears to
be consistent with these policies.
The Housing Element says
1.26.11 The Edna -Islay Specific Plan guides development of 446 acres in the southern
portion of the city. Adopted in 1983, the plan includes only low- and medium- density
housing. About two- thirds of the area has been developed. By amending the specific
plan to include a mix of residential zoning that approximates the mix of residential
densities citywide, additional housing units are possible in the Edna -Islay specific
planning area. The City should initiate amendments to designate a portion of the specific
planning area for medium -high density housing.
This policy clearly supports a change to a higher - density designation for some portions of the
specific plan area.
Conclusion: Not significant. If the City Council supports the provision of low -cost
housing on the site, it should initiate a general plan amendment and rezoning, as
provided by the Housing Element (possibly as part of a change affecting a larger portion
of the Edna -Islay area). The low -cost housing units have not been designed, and are not
a part of proposed near -future development, so it would be premature for the applicant
to secure such a land use change at this time.
Transportation and circulation
Street design:: The proposal shows an extension of Goldenrod through the site, with a stub street
at the end. The parcel is a small part of the entire secondary planning area of the Edna -Islay
Specific Plan, and therefore the circulation pattern is not complete. The plan will allow for
further extension and connections with future streets, but at this time is essentially a long dead -
end street.
The City's subdivision regulations require a maximum length of 300' for such streets, where the
number of dwellings on the street is more than four. This length will allow reasonable access
to homes on the street by emergency personnel if the street is blocked at the intersection. The
proposed street extension is over 1,000 feet long, and provides access to 39 lots. If access to
Goldenrod were blocked at Poinsettia, all of these lots would be beyond the reach of residents
or emergency equipment.
�� I
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 6
To address this situation, the developers plan to provide a 20' -wide access road from Fuller
Road to a stub driveway two lots from the westerly end of Goldenrod. The emergency access
road would span the creek, and would presumably be removed when further development
renders it unnecessary.
The Fire Department says that an emergency access road is desirable, but not required. If built,
it should be 20' wide, and the bridge over the creek needs to be adequate to support fire
equipment. Whether or not an emergency access road is built, a turnaround is required near the
proposed end of Goldenrod. Such a turnaround could be created by the use of future lot sites,
or some other area not intended for development. There appears to be adequate room for such
a turnaround, and the developers are willing to create one. If the emergency access road is not
built, it would still be possible, in serious emergencies, for equipment to reach the end of
Goldenrod from Fuller Road.
It is never desirable to create long dead -end streets, unless future development will correct the
problem. In this case, the street will terminate at a new City Limit, which means that future
development on adjacent land may take place while that land is still under County jurisdiction,
and may not be consistent with the EISP's circulation pattern. In reviewing this annexation
request, the City Council will have to determine if the provision of additional homes in the city
is worth the additional risk of creating a street that is not consistent with city standards, and
which may never be.
Conclusion: Maybe significant.
Recommended mitigation:
.--keiea pattefa in the 06P.
ondary emergency access crust
be provided -t as suggested by the applicants.
-425
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 7
Traffic levels: Traffic on Goldenrod and Poinsettia will increase with the occupancy of homes
on this street extension. If alternative access is not provided through a looped street system,
then all traffic from this project will use Goldenrod, a local street, and Poinsettia, a residential
collector street
Traffic levels are expected to increase by 372 trips per day, and by 39 trips during peak evening
hours, according to calculations based on averages collected by the Institute of Traffic
Engineers. Saturday trips are expected to increase by 397. No traffic counts are available for
Poinsettia Street, but counts for Tank Farm Road indicate that the streets in this area are well
under capacity. The development of 39 lots would not increase the load significantly.
The draft Circulation Element of the general plan recommends that new residential area be
designed with the goal of limiting traffic on local streets below 500 -800 vehicles per day, and
keeping levels on residential collectors below 3,000 trips per day.
If no alternative access is provided for the new homes, Goldenrod would be expected to carry
up to 583 trips per day, and 622 per Saturday. Poinsettia, if it were to serve half of the homes
on the east side of the tracks, could be carrying as many as 3,000 vehicles per day. However,
as the remainder of the secondary planning area is developed, Fuller Road will be developed as
an alternative access to Broad Street. This mid -point access should take a significant number
of trips away from Poinsettia.
Conclusion: Less than significant.
Public services
Emergency access. According to the submitted plans, Goldenrod would be extended to a length
of about 1,440 feet. There would be no secondary access except for a 20' -wide emergency
access road that would cross the creek and join with Fuller Road. The Fuller Road bridge has
been strengthened to allow passage by fire engines.
The Fire Department requires a turnaround sufficient in size and design for fire equipment, but
does not require this emergency access road. There is adequate room on the site for such a
turnaround, and the developers are willing to create one.
Conclusion: Less than significant. Fire code requirements must be met and can be met.
Utilities
The site is outside the City Limits, and is not served by any city services. Development within
the City Limits will mean that water and sewer lines will need to be extended, and the city's
capacity for these utilities must be assured.
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 8
Sewer. The nearest sewer connection is in Poinsettia Street at Fuller Road. Gravity flow from
the Goldenrod line to the Poinsettia line would require bridging the creek at an elevation above
the creek flow line. Exposed pipes across creeks are undesirable for aesthetic and maintenance
reasons. A logical ultimate connection is to the nearest manhole in Broad Street, which appears
to be at an elevation that can easily accommodate the extension of a line in Goldenrod.
However, this manhole is about 2,000 feet away, and would require access through property not
owned by the applicants.
As noted in the project description, the area to be annexed is a small portion of the secondary
planning area. If the remaining secondary planning area is annexed in the future, then sewer
lines would be extended through the new streets to Broad Street. It is therefore desirable to
allow this type of connection to take place in the future, while still providing adequate sewer
service in the interim, which may be indefinitely.
To achieve this result, the applicants are proposing to install a gravity line from the existing end
of Goldenrod to the new termination point, provide a small lift station at the end of Goldenrod
and a force main back up. The applicants also propose to install a transmitter that transmits to
the City's existing telemetry tystem so that any failure of the system will trigger an alarm at the
sewage treatment plant. The City's Utilities Engineer approves the proposal for the short- and
long -term, provided that the applicants submit sufficient evidence, in the form of schematic
maps, to show that a gravity line from Goldenrod, through future streets (shown on specific plan
maps) to Broad Street is feasible.
Conclusion: Not significant. Sewer service can be provided that meets City standards.
Water. Water connections can be made through an extension of the Goldenrod water line, _
stubbed at the end. Availability of water to serve the new homes is discussed under "Energy
and resource use ", below.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Noise levels
The City's adopted and draft Noise Element policies, and common practice, say that noise levels
of 60 Ldn or less are "acceptable" in residential areas. Higher noise levels need to be mitigated.
Ai=rt noise. The site is about 1,700 feet (about .32 mile) from the San Luis Obispo airport.
State law (SB 1453 - Chapter 438) requires that initial studies of sites within two nautical miles
(2.3 miles) of a public use airport include a discussion of whether the project will result in a
safety hazard or noise problems for residents or airport workers and users.
4407
>� 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 9
The proposed development will be residential, and should pose no hazards for airport workers
or users. Noise from the airport, however, may pose a problem for the residents.
Projections of noise from operating the airport at capacity (anticipated after the year 2010),
including the use of larger planes, are included in the technical appendix to the draft Noise
Element, completed in 1991 (but not yet adopted). These projections indicate that the 60 CNEL
(roughly equivalent to 60 Ld.) noise contour is about 1,500 feet from the site. Noise levels are
expected to be lower beyond that 1,500 feet.
Conclusion: Noise levels from the airport will not be significant.
Railroad. The site is about 500' from the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The technical
appendix in the draft Noise Element projects that future trains, without horns, will create a 60
L,, average noise level 352' from the tracks. Trains with horns would be expected to subject
property 525' from the tracks to noise levels averaging 60 Ld,. Therefore, a portion of lots
nearest the City Limit (proposed lots 32, 33, 37, and 38) may experience noise levels between
60 and 65 L,,.
Conclusion: Less than significant. The higher noise levels would affect a small portion
of four lots. The majority of the lots would be subjected to acceptable noise levels.
Traffic noise. The site is about 1,150 feet from Broad Street (Highway 227), a major noise
source. The appendix to the draft Noise Element projects that sites 292 feet from the center of
Broad Street, in this vicinity, will receive average noise exposures of 60 L. from traffic in the
future. Noise exposure at the site from traffic on Broad would be considerably less than 60
Conclusion: Not significant.
Cumulative noise impacts. Noise contour maps in the technical appendix of the draft Noise
Element, based on future noise from all three sources above, indicate that no part of the site will
be subjected to noise levels above 60 Ld.. To understand this, it is important to know that sound
measuring techniques are complex. Cumulative impacts from noise sources are not added
linearly. The addition of a noise source that is lower than the ambient noise level usually has
a minimal effect on the overall noise levels. For example, if a site is exposed to two noise
sources, each of which results in a level of 60 Ld., the two added together will create a level of
63 Ld.. Where one exposure is 50 and the other 60, the cumulative noise level is about 60.4
Lam. It is because of the properties of sound waves that the three sources together do not subject
the site to levels above 60 L,,.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Surface water flow and quality
a
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 10
Plant and animal life
Two branches of an intermittent creek (tributaries of the East fork of the San Luis Obispo Creek)
form the northerly and southerly boundaries of the proposed subdivision. The lower branch
flows along the southerly property line and the upper flows approximately through the center of
the site. The upper branch, according to the Open Space Element, has a degraded corridor
while the lower branch has a good riparian corridor.
The Open Space Element says that, in part to preserve and improve the habitat for specialized
plant and animal communities, creek corridors and setback area should be preserved through
easements or dedications, and that such easements should be required as a condition of
discretionary and development approvals. The element further says that where creeks are to be
restored, planting of invasive, non -native plants should be prohibited, and trees should not be
removed except when determined appropriate by the City Arborist. (see Section 2B.) The goal
of the element is to maintain creek buffer area at least 20' wide along the tops of the banks of
creeks, and wider area where significant riparian vegetation extends beyond that width.
The proposal calls for locating single - family lots between the two creek corridors. The majority
of proposed lot lines are sited at least 20' from the top of bank of the creek branches. Some lots
(6, 15, 167 172 21, 22, 23, and 32) appear to have lot lines almost touching creek banks. Very
little significant riparian vegetation exists within the proposed lot areas.
On those lots where the top of bank is closer than 20' to the lot line, it would be possible, within
zoning limitations, to build homes closer than 20' to the top of bank, and it would be likely that
future lot owners would plant non -native vegetation within the 20' area. Such actions would not
be consistent with Open Space Element creek policies. _
Conclusion: May be significant.
Recommended mitigation: The subdivision map must be .designed to incorporate
adequate creek buffer area and provide for restoration planting where necessary,
consistent with goals and policies in the Open Space Element.
Archeological or historical resources
The site is vacant and about fifteen acres in size. The City's archeological guidelines say that
an archeological surface survey must be required in several instances, one of which is for
requests for annexations larger than one acre. Such a survey will determine the probability of
archeological resources on the site, and will include recommended mitigation measures, if
warranted. Mitigation may affect the layout of future streets or locations for building, but is not
expected to eliminate all potential for future use.
4-�i
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 11
Conclusion: May be significant. Discovery of archeological resources may affect the
timing and the design of subdivisions on this property.
* A qualified archeologist shall be hired by the applicant to conduct a surface
survey of the site, to be completed and submitted to the City along with the
subdivision application, in accordance with the City's archaeological guidelines.
These guidelines call for the archeologist to be approved by the Community
Development Director, and state that the archaeologist must submit his or her
findings in a report format acceptable to the Director. If surface survey results
indicate that archeological resources may exist, the project archeologist must
recommend, in a separate cover letter, specific mitigation measures. These
measures will be reviewed by the Director, or referred to the Cultural Heritage
Committee for possible inclusion into the description of the project.
Energy or resource use
The project is expected to use about 13 acre -feet of water per year when occupied, assuming all
39 lots are created plus seven additional low -cost dwellings. Since the site is vacant and not
irrigated, there is no water use presently. The new use, then, represents a water use increase.
The City's Water Allocation Regulations allow new development only when it does not affect
the city's supply. This can happen only if the new use replaces a similar use of a similar size,
or if water is provided by some other means to replace that used. One method, allowed by the
regulations, to obtain building permits is to retrofit existing plumbing fixtures. The City allows
a developer to replace fixtures to save approximately twice as much water as the new
development is expected to use. When retrofitting is done, the net effect on the city's water
supplies should be beneficial. The developer may use on -site wells for non - potable uses, if
approved by the City Council. Well use would reduce the amount of water needed to below 13
acre -feet.
In essence, then, the annexation could be served by any of the following methods:
a. City water supply, including reclaimed water (if new sources are available);
b. Reduction of use of city water in existing development so that there will be no net
increase in long -term water usage (retrofitting option);
C. Use of private well water, but only temporarily, pending availability of an approved
addition to city water sources, and only when it is demonstrated that the use of well
water will not diminish the city's municipal groundwater supply.
r
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 12
At this time, no new sources are available and will not be available for several years (unless the
developers provide a private source). Therefore, the first option is not open to this project at
this time.
The draft Urban Water Management Plan says that retrofitting opportunities (the second option)
will be restricted for all minor annexations, to a maximum of 33 acre-feet of expected water use.
This means that if applicants for other minor annexations retrofit fixtures to provide 33 acre -feet
of water for their developments, then the applicants for this annexation will be required to secure
water through another source. Until an acceptable source is secured, no development will be
allowed.
A recently- approved minor annexation of property on South I iguera Street (the "TK
Annexation ") is expected to use between 15 and 20 acre -feet of water when developed. No
other minor annexations are currently under review. Therefore, if 20 acre -feet are allocated to
the TK annexation, 13 acre -feet would remain available to the Goldenrod annexation. It is
likely, therefore, that water will be available to this development if the developers retrofit
sufficient plumbing fixtures within the city.
The developers say that well water is a remote and unlikely possibility at this location. It does
not appear that sufficient groundwater is available.
It is likely that the developers will be able to retrofit fixtures in existing development to obtain
a sufficient supply. If this option is not available at the time of development, another source will
be required or the development will be unable to proceed. In no case will the development be
allowed to deplete existing supplies. With the water regulations in force, development in the
annexed area will not have a detrimental effect on the available supply.
Conclusion: Not significant.
Other impacts.
The annexation is not expected to have significant impacts on any other aspect of the
environment.
RI
Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact, with the following
4--;31
ER 110-93
4380 Broad Street: Goldenrod annexation
Page 13
0
may never be eeinpleted as planned. Te address this ,
land is annexed as well.
' ' econdary emergency access s
be provide#;o<t[e>' as suggested b the applicants.
.....:......
gg Y
o The subdivision map must be designed to incorporate adequate creek buffer areas and
provide for restoration planting where necessary, consistent with goals and policies in the
Open Space Element.
o A qualified archeologist shall be hired by the applicant to conduct a surface survey of the
site, to be completed and submitted to the City along with the subdivision application,
in accordance with the City's archaeological guidelines. These guidelines call for the
- archeologist to be approved by the Community Development Director, and state that the
_archaeologist must submit his or her findings in a report format acceptable to the
Director. If surface survey results indicate that archeological resources may exist, the
project archeologist must recommend, in a separate cover letter, specific mitigation
measures. These measures will be reviewed by the Director, or referred to the Cultural
Heritage Committee for possible inclusion into the description of the project.
4-3�
city of San luis OBISpo
INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
SITE LOCATION Edna -Islay secondary planning area APPLICATION NO. 154-94
PROJECTDESCRIPTION Amendment to Edna -Islay Specific Plan text, to make the annexation policy
consistent with the recently- adopted Land Use Element annexation policies.
APPLICANT City of San Luis Obispo
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
X NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY AEC
PREPARED BY Judith Lautner,
DEVELOPMENT DI
ACTION: !
er
MITIGATION INCLUDED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED
DATE NOV. 17, 1994
DATE
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
II. POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
A. COMMUNITY PLANS AND GOALS ....................................................
NEWE-
B. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH ........................................... _ ?io ?7 m
C. LAND USE ........................................ ............................... NEWE
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ............... ....... .........................
E. PUBLIC SERVICES .................................... ............................... AIolgi
F. UTILITIES.......... ...................... ............................... Nola
G. NOISE LEVELS ..................................... ............................... AT9ATE
H. GEOLOGIC & SEISMIC HAZARDS & TOPOGRAPHIC MODIFICATIONS .................... NONE
1. AIR QUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS ........................... : ............. ......... . NONE
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ............... ............................... NANE
K PLANT LIFE ....................................... ..........:.................... NOI�TE
L ANIMAL LIFE ..................................... ...........................6...
N NF
M. ARCHAEOLOGICAL! HISTORICAL .................... ............................... NONF
N. AESTHETIC ............................... NONE
O. ENERGYIRESOURCE USE ........................... ............................... NONE*
P. OTHER ........................................... ............................... NONE*
Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION
'SEE ATTACHED REPORT +-33
ER 154 -94
Edna -Islay Specific Plan Amendment
Annexation policy
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project is the amendment of annexation policies in the Edna -
Islay Specific Plan text, to be consistent with the recently -
adopted Land Use Element (LUE) annexation policies.
The specific plan says, under "secondary planning area - proposed
land use policies ":
Annexation: Adequate water supply will be assured by the city
before this area should be considered for annexation. Any
future annexation requests should be consistent with this
specific plan, the city's general plan, and subsequent growth
management problems. ( "programs" was probably intended.)
The staff - recommended amendment says (red;lnng: indicates
additional wording, ,.t-�oute indicate text to be "`deleted):
Annexation. Adequate water supply will be assu:red by the e4t�
he:fe ae this area should be eansidered €ev annematlen. Any
future annexation requests should be consistent with this
specific plan, the city's general plan, and subsequent growth
management p=eb4ems pr'ggrams.
The amended wording would make the policy consistent with adopted
land use element policies.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Community plans and coals
The City Council recently adopted a land use element that spells
out annexation policies for all potential annexations. The intent
of the- policies is to provide a consistent method for treating
annexation requests throughout the city.- The Edna -Islay specific
Plan (EISP) , adopted in 1982, contains a policy on annexations that
was consistent with the 1977 Land Use Element policies but is not
consistent with the current LUE policies in one respect. The
amendment would eliminate that one inconsistency, and therefore
create- consistency between two City policy documents. Therefore,
the amendment would be consistent with community plans and goals.
Conclusion: No impacts.
Population distribution and growth
The amendment would allow annexations of portions of the secondary
planning area prior to the provision of a secure water source for
the area. If water is not available, development will not be
=2
ER 154 -94
Edna -Islay Specific Plan amendment
Page 2
allowed. If water is available, in accordance with City water
management policies, then development will be possible. Such
development would lead to increases in the population (in
accordance with growth managment policies and programs).
Existing policies .in the EISP allow annexation of the secondary
planning area only when water is available. once annexed, the area
could be developed and such development would lead to population
increases. Therefore, with or without the amendment, development
will be allowed only when water is available. The amendment would
have no effect on the timing of population distribution or growth.
Conclusion: No impacts.
Enemy or resource use
The amendment would allow annexation prior to the availability of
water for development. However, the City's water management
policies would allow development only when water is available that
is not needed to serve development within the July 1994 city
limits. Therefore, newly- annexed areas would not be allowed to
affect the water supply or cost for property within the city limits
prior to the annexations.
Conclusion: No impacts.
Other impacts
The amendment is not expected to have impacts on any other aspect
of the environment.
RECOMMENDATION
Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact.
4 -3s
ml
W&W
-Alk.
r' .E /
000 1
o
O�
;=- W
OQ
J
Q Z�
W
0
ug
CL Q W
Q
Q.
i
c%
m
_
—
ma
me
Ec
m
mm
p
mm
a
c
m
—E
`—'E
o;
IL
my
cm
mm
mo
a�
E�
mo
"a
my
E3
v
as
r' .E /
000 1
o
O�
;=- W
OQ
J
Q Z�
W
0
ug
CL Q W
Q
Q.
i
C-9
{` L-i
U.1
ZWQ
a =a
OZ
M
tt�
ZQ=
O � CC
//W Q
/
V �
♦
'o.
O
06
}� q
+ ` J r
;:,.,.� •�, Via, q2
Iµ
r/
Z�.
IL
� t
8
,
I
O
4-3�
o
IL
�yJ
C-9
{` L-i
U.1
ZWQ
a =a
OZ
M
tt�
ZQ=
O � CC
//W Q
/
V �
♦
'o.
O
06
}� q
+ ` J r
;:,.,.� •�, Via, q2
Iµ
r/
Z�.
IL
� t
8
,
I
O
4-3�
H /
QW
O /
LU
LL e `
S S W
N
W N
2 r U Q /
M,� tc
a
W
a
a
z
c
W
600 000 000, 00
16
W
\ a
/ \ N
C
ti
1
Y
a
a �
0
n
N
U �
Q
Q
C
� o
\ N
N
1 `c`�Gt1`�PV
a � �
W
s
x �
d
I'
i
U/
Q �
O /
W
W
U. Vy
aW
na
wa
Z
�:M,
Omt
�.
z �
JLL
�?
C!�
0
/ V I
y
4.
8
¢p~ N
Z
0
French Brother Development
P. O. Box 1797, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
(805) 5443613
March 28, 1994
Judy Lautner
Community Development Department
City Hall
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Goldenrod Annexation — -
Dear Judy:
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me last week to discuss your request that the above
referenced annexation be enlarged to include two adjoining properties in order to expand previous
local area circulation planning. As I pointed out the adjoining property owners are unwilling or
unable to participate in such a proposal at this time.
We believe that the proposed circulation is adequate to accommodate the level of development
contemplated, establishes a reasonable circulation plan for the area that will accommodate an
appropriate level of development on the adjoining properties if and when they are developed, and
will encourage development of adjoining properties in a manner that will be consistent with the
land use patterns prescribed in the Edna Islay Specific Plan for the Secondary Planning Area.
(Commercial land use between the creek and Broad Street and residential land use East of the
creek.) —
We request that you to proceed with preparation of an environmental determination on our
proposal. Please consider the following in making that evaluation:
Extension of Fuller Road to Broad Street and replacement of the Fuller Road Bridge:
We are willing to participate in the cost of replacing the existing Fuller Road Bridge by
funding the City's share of the State bridge replacement program (10 %). This cost and a
prorata share of the cost of widening Fuller Road would be paid through fees collected
prior to construction of homes.
Bike and Pedestrian Access to Broad Street:
We are willing to offer for dedication to the public a 20 foot wide right -of -way for a bike
and pedestrian crossing of our property so that a link can ultimately be made between
Broad Street and the Clover Creek development.
I ��
Dedication of Open Space Easements:
We are willing to dedicate to the public an open space easement over the entire creek area
of our property.
Affordable Housing:
We are willing to develop seven affordable housing units on that portion of our property
North of the creek when Fuller Road is extended to Broad Street.
Airport Annexation Assessment District / Transportation Fees:
We are willing to waive our right to protest formation of an assessment district for the
area wide improvements associated with annexation of the Airport Area into the City of
San Luis Obispo and/or imposition of area -wide transportation fees associated with
annexation of the Airport Area for a period of five years.
If you require any other information in order to complete the evaluation of the environmental
impact of our proposal please contact me.
Thank you again for your assistance.
Sincerely,
ohn French,
Project Manager.
Page 2 4--3q
Minutes
11/30/94
Forthcoming � -
owli
purpose and intent
This specific plan concentrates on what should happen in the primary
planning area - -the property that lies within the city limits. However,
like the city's land use element, this plan also looks at the long -te .m
use of -land next to proposed housing development but in the county.
These areas are shown on figure 2 and are defined as the "secondary
planning area." The city has included adjacent county areas in this
specific plan for the following reasons:
- It is the intent of the plan to encourage land uses in adjacent
county areas which are compatible with those planned inside the
city. This specific plan is the city's official recommendation to
the county government for what should happen in the secondary
planning area.
- The plan shows how utilities and roads in the county area could link
up with those planned in the city. This type of coordination can,
in the long run, benefit both areas.
The planning and development problems in adjacent county areas, if
left unresolved, may reduce the quality of life for residents in the
primary planning area. This plan tries to suggest order to the
currently unplanned county area. If carried out, recommendation
of.this plan could benefit both county property owners and city
residents.
fl S P D--/oeePV
50 441
- 11
proposed land use policies �'" '�
Within the secondary planning area the following land use policies and
provisions should apply. These policies are the city's official
- recommendations to the county government and are intended to refine those
policies contained in the 1977 General Plan Land Use Element.
- Future Use: The long -term use of the secondary planning area should be
as shown on figure 27 and 28 of this report. The types of activities
permitted within each land use category should be as defined in
appropriate sections of this Specific Plan or, when not included here,
as defined within the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Immediate Use: Until property within the secondary planning area is
annexed to the city, future residential areas should be used for
agriculture with a minimum parcel size of 10- acres; service commercial
areas may be used for "rural industrial" activities. Rural industrial
policies contained in the city's land use element will apply to these
areas. Retail commercial areas should generally not be intensified.
City Services: Unless this area is annexed to the city, the city will
not permit municipal water or sewer mains to serve land uses in the
secondary planning area.
- Annexation: Adequate water supply will be assured by the city before
this area should be considered for annexation. Any future annexation
requests should be consistent with this specific plan, the city's
general plan, and subsequent growth management problems.
- County Referrals: Request to further subdivide or develop land within
the secondary planning area should be referred by the appropriate
county agency to the city for comment.
- Countz Adoption: The county government will be asked to adopt this
specs is plan as a refinement to its General Plan Land Use Element for
the San Luis Obispo Area.
- Property Development Standards: Property development standards spelled
out in other parts of this report should generally apply within the
secondary planning area. This includes provisions for land use buffers
between commercial and residential areas.
51 4-4;�
•
proposed circulation ��'4
' Within the secondary planning area, the following provisions should
aPP1Y•
These policies are the city's official recommendation to the county
government and are consistent with the 1981 San Luis Obispo Circulation
Element.
- Standards: All streets developed in the secondary planning a
either before or after annexation to the city) should be built to city
I standards as defined in the San Luis Obispo Subdivision Regulations.
- Installation of Street Improvements: Street and drainage improvements
should be installed when property in the secondary planning area is
further subdivided or developed, whichever happens first.
- Layout of Streets: The specific plan shows how streets may be laid out
to serve different properties. This layout should generally be
followed. In particular:
I- Fuller Road should be widened to city standards and connected with
streets in the primary planning area. The bridge over the creek
on Fuller Road should be replaced. Emergency access to Phase 4 of
the Edna Area shall be provided using Fuller Road. (See also page
59).
- Primary access to the secondary planning area should be from
Broad Street, Tank Farm Road; Fuller Road and Industrial Way.
Streets should be laid out so that traffic from service commercial
areas does not pass through housing areas.
- The street system in the secondary planning area should minimize
the number of creek crossings.
52
4 -43
to,
CL Q
g
W M
W
N
>' a
C W
a�
Za
W
O
V
NZ
Z
'Z
JZ
J
Q J
as
d
O
V
441.
8
le
0
4- 45
draft
Minutes
WPOUNCIL
❑
CDD DIR
City of San Luis Obispo
Meeting MEETING AGENDA
12(CAO
❑
FIN DIR
Planning Commission
?S '14
ra"ACAO
❑
FIRE CHIEF
November 30, 1994 DATEI"17- ITEM #
2(ATTORNEY
❑
PW DIR
eCMWORIG
❑
POUCE CHF
❑ MGWr TEAM ❑
❑ C T: ❑
REG DIR
UTILDIR
Commrs. Mary Whittlesey, Barry Karleskint,
❑
PERSDIR
Gilbert Hoffman, Grant Williams, Charles Senn
(arrival 8 p.m.), Acting Chairman Gilbert
Hoffman
ABSENT:
Commrs. Dodie Williams, Brett Cross
STAFF PRESENT:
Judith Lautner, Assoc. Planner; Ron Whisenand,
Development Review Manager; and Laura Murphy,
Recording Secretary
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as printed.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
0
Item 1. 4370 Broad Street - Goldenrod Minor Annexation:
A. Consideration of annexation of 15 acres within Edna -Islay
secondary planning area; (ANNX 110 -93) and
B. Consideration of prezoning for the same property from R -1
(County) to R -1 -SP (City) zone; Charles .French,
applicant. (R 110 -93).
and
Item 2. Broad Street -Tank Farm Area: Amendment to the annexation
policy in the Edna -Islay Specific Plan, to be consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Element; City of San Luis
Obispo, applicant. (SP 154 -94)
Judith Lautner presented the staff report, recommending approval of
the prezoning and the text amendment based on findings in the staff
report.
Ms. Lautner clarified that Parcels A and Parcel B were under
different ownership. The preferences of the other property owners
concerning the annexation were not known.
Acting Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing.
John French 4360 Sunflower applicant and owner, said he thought the
staff report covered the various aspects: of the proposed
jk
annexation— He said the application follows the Edna -Islay
Specific Plan. He believed that action on a minor annexation at
draft
Minutes
Planning commission
November 30, 1994
Page 2
the project location would encourage adjacent property owners to
request annexation also. He felt that either the "turn- around" or
the "emergency access" circulation alternatives would produce an
attractive subdivision.
Responding to a question from Commr. Whittlesey, Mr. French
estimated that development could begin in the spring of 1996, after
approval of the tentative map. The map process will address all
specific concerns about the project.
He also said that he had not personally spoken to the owners of the
adjacent property, although his brother had. He also said that it
was his understanding that the environmental determination would be
much more extensive if the other parc &ls were to be included in the
annexation.
He clarified that the Fire Dept. did have concerns about emergency
access, but he noted that the subdivision would have standard -width
streets, allowing fir truck access, and all the houses would have
fire sprinklers for additional protection. He also said that the
bridge on Fuller Road was reinforced during Phase I of Tract 1360
to carry the load of fire engines. He indicated indicated his
intent to assist in the rebuilding of the bridge into a standard
bridge and the completion of improvements to Fuller Road, at a
later time.
Roy Garcia, 547 Prado Road, property owner of the lot labeled
Parcel B. He expressed an interest in working something out with
the French brothers, as he would like to see his parcel and the
proposed parcel annexed to the City at the same time. He also said
that his property has a 40' right of way to. Broad Street, and
wondered if that would be of any benefit to the proposed
development, which would mean bypassing Fuller Road and accessing
Broad Street.directly.
Acting Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Judith Lautner clarified that part of Fuller Road is a public road
and the private portion is approved emergency access for fire
vehicles, and would have to be dedicated on a map to become a
public road. She also said the County zoning for the project
parcel and adjoining parcels is residential, commercial and some
industrial which is roughly echoed by the specific plan's proposed
zoning for the area.
In answer to a question by Commr. Hoffman she explained that only
adding Parcel B would not be beneficial because it could result in
an even longer dead -end street.
Responding to queries by Commr. G. Williaps,,Ron Whisenand
clarified- -that if the parcels were all annexed there would be three
parcels competing for a limited amount of water. Judy Lautner also
draft
Minutes
Planning Commission
November 30, 1994
Page 3
pointed out that although there is a possible expansion of the City
water supply on the horizon, the City is taking the conservative
view by allowing 33 acre feet of water for minor annexations at
this time. She also noted that if the proposed annexation were
approved, the applicant would be able to develop the property, but
if Parcel B were to join the annexation it could put the demand for
water over the 33 acre feet limit.
Ron Whisenand clarified that if the Commission is .considering
incorporating other parcels in the annexation, staff recommends
that all three parcels be considered at the same time because of
the circulation issues. This action. would raise environmental
concerns about water availability but that does not mean the
properties cannot be annexed, but the properties would not be able
to be developed until the water is available, which would be.
consistent with the recently adopted Land Use Element.
Judy Lautner explained that if all three parcels were recommended
for annexation then it would be incumbent on the City to make the
application to LAFCO and the City would be required to adopt a
resolution of intention to annex.
Commr. Whittlesey was concerned that the potential for development
of the entire circulation plan is contingent on water availability
for the other parcels. It would be possible that an 1100 foot
dead - end.street would exist for many years when 300 feet is the
City standard.
Commr. Hoffman felt that requiring an emergency access would be
preferable over the long term, although development would result in
having a bit more traffic on the existing streets.
Ron Whisenand clarified that it was determined in the environmental
document that the additional traffic would be less than significant
and there would not be mitigation measures needed to reduce traffic
levels since it would still be within the limits that the
Circulation Element had identified for those streets.
The Commission discussed the advisability of annexing the parcels
when all the property owners had not been contacted.
Judy Lautner reminded the Commission that two actions were needed,
one on the prezoning and one on the text amendment, and action on
the actual annexation is only appropriate at the end of the process
after the proposal has gone to LAFCO.
A motion was made by Commr. Karleskint and seconded by Commr.
Whittlesey, to recommend approval of the pre zoning to the City
Council based on the following findings:
1. The prezoning is consistent with the Ge 'eral Plan Land Use
- Element (LUE) map and text, because a) Low - ensity Residential
zoning is consistent with the Low- Density Residential land use
draft
Minutes
Planning Commission
November 30, 1994
Page 4
designation on the LUE map, and b) prezoning and annexation of
the site is consistent with LUE policies on annexation.
2. The City Council finds and determines that the project's
Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential
significant environmental impacts of the proposed rezoning,
and reflects the independent judgement of the City Council.
The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration and
incorporates the mitigation measures recommended .in the
initial study, as amended by the Planning Commission to
include a requirement for emergency access to Fuller Road,
into the project.
VOTING: AYES: Commr. Karleskint, Whittlesey, Hoffman, G.
Williams
NOES: None "
ABSENT: Commrs. D. Williams, Cross; Senn
The motion passes.
A motion was made by Commr. Karleskint and seconded by Commr.
Whittlesey recommending the approval of the text amendment to the
City Council based on the following findings:
1. The amendment to the text of the Edna -Islay Specific Plan is
consistent with the General Plan, because it will result in
consistency between the two documents.
VOTING: AYES: Commr. Karleskint, Whittlesey, Hoffman, G.
Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commrs. D. Williams, Cross, Senn
The motion passes.
Note arrival of Commr. Senn
COMMENT "& DISCUSSION
Item 2. STAFF COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
Ron Whisenand gave the project update and agenda forecast with the
Leal Project coming back for discussion at the next meeting on Dec.
14, 1994. He also said that the Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance
on the December 28, 1994 meeting agenda.
Commr. Hoffman asked that the election !of the Commission
draft
Minutes
Planning Commission
November 30, 1994
Page 5
Chairperson to replace outgoing Chairwoman D. Williams be included
on the Dec. 14,1994 meeting agenda.
Item 3. COMMISSION COMMENT & DISCUSSION
Ron Whisenand clarified for the Commission that Bill Statler, the
Finance Director would be addressing them concerning the budget and
now is the time for the Commission to give their recommendations to
the City Council as to work programs that the Commission would like
to work on and determining priority projects that the Commission
would like to have done in the next two years.
Bill Statler gave an overview of the City Budget process to the
Commission and discussed the role of City Council Advisory Bodies,
specifically the Planning Commission in the budget planning
process. He said that in middle to late January 1995 the City
Council will hold a "goal setting" session and set the goals for
the next two years so the Finance Department can begin preparing
the preliminary budget, with the CAO issuing the preliminary budget
in late April or early May for City Council and public review. The
City Council will then hold budget workshops and hearings and by
June 30, 1995 the City Council will adopt the two -year budget.
Bill Statler clarified that the list of goals and priorities of the
Planning Commission should.be submitted by the middle of January
1995.
The Commission discussed some of their concerns and priorities
including concerns about the creation of Ag. zoning areas, the
comprehensive subdivision ordinance update, the neighborhood
commercial zoning workshop, creek setback ordinance, second units,
terms for second dwellings and secondary dwelling units, as well as
demolition and recycling standards.
Commr. Senn asked that an additional item be added for Commission
discussion, which was why the City has not annexed the land on
Broad St. from Rockview to the airport on both sides of the street?
Ron Whisenand said he would put the goal setting task back on the
agenda.
Commission discussion included ways the members could best prepare
for the "goal setting" Commission meeting including: a careful
review of the Commission retreat notes and that each member prepare
their own list of priority projects.]
The Commissioners expressed an interest in having John Mandeville
also attend the goal setting Commission meeting.
On-a motion -by Commissioner whittlesey and seconded by Commissioner
Karleskint, the meeting adjourned to the next regular meeting Of
draft
Minutes
Planning Commission
November 30, 1994
Page 6
the Planning Commission scheduled for December 14, 1994 at 7 p.m.
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm.Street.
Respectfully submitted,
Laura Murphy
Recording Secretary
M