The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/21/1998, 8 - STATUS REPORT ON AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ALTERNATIVES council °°` r j aGEnaa Pepont ®N°� CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Direct Prepared By: John Mandeville, Long-Range PI g Manag SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ALTERNATIVES CAO RECOMMENDATION Accept the status report and confirm the four specific plan alternatives proposed by staff and the specific plan consultants. REPORT-IN-BRIEF In September 1997 the Council approved a contract for consultant services to prepare the Airport Area Specific Plan and the related facilities master plans. By December the planning was underway. Phases I and II of the consultants work program are now complete. A determination on the four specific project alternatives marks the end of Phase 2 and the beginning of work to draft the specific plan,the environmental impact report(EIR) and the related facilities master plans. When the Council approved the scope of work for the consultant contract in April 1997, specific direction was given regarding the analysis of alternatives to the project. The Council directed that the alternatives evaluate the expansion of the City's urban reserve line (URL)to encompass the areas beyond that boundary recently designated by the County for commercial or industrial uses. The Council direction also noted that a URL expansion should only analyze the area to better implement City policies regarding the Airport Area. Phase lI of the work program concluded with the identification of project alternatives. Further work on the specific plan and the EIR will be based these alternatives. Any work done on the analysis of these alternatives past this point in the process would amount to wasted effort if the alternative is not acceptable to Council. Staff and consultants have defined four distinct alternatives we feel are consistent with the Council's previous direction. It is,however,prudent at this time for the Council to review the alternatives and confirm that they are consistent with the earlier direction. This staff report provides a brief status update on the overall work program and describes the four alternatives to the project that will be analyzed. The Council should review these alternatives and direct staff to make any corrections or modifications necessary to define four acceptable alternatives. Council Agenda Report—Airport Area Specific Plan Status & EIR Alternatives Page 2 DISCUSSION Status Report A work program schedule is provided in Attachment 1. The work program schedule lists the five phases that comprise the work program. Phases 1 and 2 of the work program are completed. Some work involved in Phase 3,preparing the draft plans, has been completed. Community participation and input in the planning process have been solicited through two town hall meetings,three focus group meetings,two newsletters, and staff involvement in various interested community organizations. As recently as late June and early July,two focus group meetings were held to develop recommendations for land use entitlements to be provided by the specific plan. Developing the drainage alternatives in Phase 2 took longer than originally anticipated,however staff felt additional time was justified in order to combine the environmental reconnaissance results with the alternative drainage designs. One of the guiding principles in the scope of work for this project is environmental planning and design. Additional time was necessary in order to develop environmental enhancement based drainage solutions rather than solutions with engineering as the only design factor. The schedule shown in Attachment 1 has been adjusted to reflect the additional time needed for the drainage alternatives. The project schedule now anticipates completion of draft plans by the end of calendar year 1998 with hearings for adopting the plans in early 1999. EIR Alternatives Why Are Alternatives Important? The purpose ofanalyzing alternatives as a part of the environmental review process is to consider different approaches to accomplishing the project objectives which will avoid or reduce project impacts. Thoughtful design of the alternatives for the EIR has an important bearing on the action the Council can take on the project because the alternatives define the range of project variations that can be approved without additional environmental review. What Determined the Alternatives Proposed? The four alternatives being recommended were developed by the City's project staff team and the consultant. The team approach was important because the alternatives primarily involve variations on land use/urban reserve boundary location, circulation&utility corridor location, and drainage. Input and concurrence from the City departments responsible for these components was necessary to produce realistic and feasible alternatives. Four principal factors were considered in developing the different alternatives: J-Z Council Agenda Report—Airport Area Specific Plan Status & EIR Alternatives Page 3 1. Implementing adopted General Plan policies, including those addressing land use, annexing the Airport Area,circulation, flood hazard protection, and open space/environmentally sensitive habitat protection. 2. Previous Council direction regarding the land outside the current urban reserve boundary that the County recently rezoned for industrial uses. 3. The opportunities and constraints analysis prepared by the consultant in Phase 1 of the work program. 4. Providing a wide enough range of project variations to provide the Council with as much flexibility as possible when the completed plan and EIR are considered for final action. Each alternative has been designed to serve buildout of the land use scenario. Because the land use scenarios are not significantly different in terms of environmental impact,the components of each alternative can generally be considered independent of one another. This provides some flexibility to combine these variations in the final project differently than the EIR does without subsequent environmental review, unless there is reason to believe a different combination will create an impact not previously considered. Alternatives Descriptions A description of each project alternative follows. Illustrations of each alternative are provided in Attachments 2A-2D. Alternative#1 (the"proiect" - see Attachment 2A) Land Use-The land use scenario for the project description is the adopted General Plan. Circulation-The adopted Circulation Element with the following new circulation components: Prado Road-Extension east as shown in draft Margarita Area Specific Plan. Drainage- The key features of the Drainage Alternative#I system include several detention basins in the Margarita Area as anticipated in the draft Margarita Area Specific Plan; capacity and habitat enhancements to Acacia Creek; improved drainage conveyance from the Margarita Area to the Unocal wetlands with environmental enhancements;culvert replacements; replacement of the existing East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek Bridge at Sante Fe Road; a multiple use detention basinlopen space area west of Sante Fe Road and south of East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek;and realignment of Tank Farm Creek immediately south of the Airport Area. �'3 Council Agenda Report—Airport Area Specific Plan Status& EIR Alternatives Page 4 Alternative#2 (see Attachment 213) Land Use-The land use scenario for this alternative is the adopted General Plan with an urban reserve boundary modification to exclude the County Airport to respond to the County's request. The properties directly south of the Airport are also excluded because they are no longer contiguous to property that would be annexed to the City. Circulation-The adopted Circulation Element. Drainage- The key features of this drainage alternative include a single detention basin in the Margarita Area;-capacity and habitat enhancements to Acacia Creek;improved drainage conveyance from the Margarita Area to the Unocal wetlands with environmental enhancements; drainage detention and environmental enhancement along the west and southwest comer of the Tank Farm area;culvert replacements; replacement of the existing East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek Bridge at Sante Fe Road;a large multiple use detention basin/open space area west of Sante Fe Road and south of East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek; and realignment of Tank Farm Creek immediately south of the Airport Area. Alternative#3 (see Attachment 20 Land Use-The land use scenario for this alternative is the adopted General Plan with an urban reserve boundary modification to exclude the County Airport but add the properties immediately east of the Airport recently rezoned to Industrial by the County(as a means to create a contiguous boundary to the properties south of the Airport that the General Plan designates for future annexation). Circulation-The adopted Circulation Element with the following modifications: Prado Road& The Prado Road extension to Broad Street is routed south to combine Tank Farm Road with Tank Faun Road east of the probable contamination area to become the primary east-west arterial. The central portion of Tank Farm Road in the area of the highest probable soil contamination is abandoned. The existing portion of Tank Fara Road west of the area of likely contamination is extended north along the southern boundary of the Margarita Area to intersect with Broad Street at Industrial Way. These roadway extensions intersect or"criss-cross"just above the area believed to be contaminated. Drainage- The key features of Drainage Alternative#3 include no detention basins in the.Margarita Area; capacity and habitat enhancements to Acacia Creek; improved drainage conveyance from the Margarita Area to the Unocal Tank Farm with environmental enhancements;buffering and development standards along the East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek between Broad Street and Sante Fe Road; use of the most feasible parts of the Tank Farm area for a majority of the drainage detention needs and habitat restoration;culvert replacements; and realignment of Tank Fane Creek immediately south of the Airport Area. a -� Council Agenda Report—Airport Area Specific Plan Status &EIR Alternatives Page 5 Alternative#4 (see Attachment 2D) Land Use-The land use scenario for this alternative is the adopted General Plan with an urban reserve boundary modification to exclude the County Airport but extend to encompass the properties immediately east of the Airport recently rezoned to Industrial by the County(as a means to create a contiguous boundary to the properties south of the Airport the General Plan designates for future annexation). The urban reserve boundary is also expanded in the southwest portion of the Airport Area to encompass the Avila Ranch property recently rezoned for Industrial uses by the County. The Avila Ranch property is also integral to the drainage and circulation alternatives associated with this alternative. Circulation-The adopted Circulation Element with the following modifications: Prado Road - Extension east as shown in draft Margarita Area Specific Plan. Los Osos Los Osos Valley Road is extended east past Vachell Lane through the Valley Road Avila Ranch property connecting with Tank Farm Road east of Sante Fe Road. Drainage- The key features of this drainage alternative include no detention basins in the Margarita Area; minimal modifications to Acacia Creek;a ring levee surrounding the Hidden Hills Mobile Home Park;culvert replacements; improved drainage conveyance from the west side of the Margarita Area to the Unocal Tank Farm with environmental enhancements; capacity and habitat improvements of the East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek between Broad Street and Sante Fe Road;replacement of the existing East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek Bridge at Sante Fe Road;a large multiple use detention basin/open space area west of Sante Fe Road and south of East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek;realignment of Tank Farm Creek immediately south of the Airport Area; and creation of a detention facility and habitat area at the southwest portion of the Avila Ranch . �-s Council Agenda Report—Airport Area Specific Plan Status & EIR Alternatives Page 6 CONCURRENCES The Public Works, Utilities, and Finance Departments, as well as the Natural Resource and Economic Development Managers participated in the development of the proposed alternatives. FISCAL BRACT The cost of the public facilities needed to serve buildout of the land use plan will vary depending on the particular design selected. The EIR will analyze approximate costs associated with the various infrastructure alternatives. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council may direct staff to modify the land use, circulation, or drainage design of any alternative as appropriate. 2. The Council may continue confirmation of the EIR alternatives as needed to obtain information needed to arrive at a decision_ ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised Project Schedule 2A-21) Alternative Land Use, Circulation and Drainage Scenarios �'6 AT10CHMENT 1 AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN & RELATED FACILITIES MASTER PLANS SCHEDULE Work Program Components 1997 1 1998 1999 S O N D J F M A M I J J A S O N D J F M A M PHASE 1: Defining the Issues Task 1.1 Project Initiation Task 1.2 Development Factors Analysis Task 1.3 Opportunities/Constraints Analysis PHASE 2: Exploring Alternatives Task 2.1 Concept Alternatives i PHASE 3: Preparing the Draft Plans Task 3.1 Draft Facilities Master Plans MIMI Task 3.2 Admin.Draft Specific Plan 122MIMMIN mm Task 3.3 Draft Specific Plan PHASE 4: Preparing the Draft EIR Task 4.1 Information Collection and Analysis Task 4.2 Initiation of the EIR Process 45 day Task 4.3 Administrative Draft EIR and MMP review Task 4.4 Draft EIR and MMP I period Task 4.5 Formal Presentation of Drafts PHASE 5: Final Document Public Hearing and Adoption Process Task 5.1 Final EIR and MMP Task 5.2 Final Specific Plan Task 5.3 Final Facilities Master Plans IL Legend Anticipated Task Duration ® Percentage Completed Jul 13, 1998 _'yi�14•41y: • AN- a �...�� Ai Mfg Ow GL' �-�•�� • 'v�vrz.raR� _ I FA ill■�:. �__ w ENO IR man % 1 • �' Ww R :___ ,� L r�ti11 uj E V1/ A ' Vj Lai' rT.' - •i I� i fi=r%j n `.�!l\q �1 @II; Wp J It-n- 4Z NN COMM a.Ir LLI $ ✓�Af �- l g l C�I I \� tf �✓ 9� a�.�7 j I I ui d itit il IN, t II j- It ISI r ••' ,/,% �� .__.�I •ep 0iep of \ I!,~ / 'Al..a "rG �� ".,nut■ S� ,�'�_'_•-:}�}��:1-�� `fi��:, • imp -0 ��5` � � �•sig -� � � Ilillllir �� ice,j S SS�j l/► HIM ��f■: Mod ddr % '■■ , o HIM �► �, .i nmm-- . 0♦� �� _� a /- v . ��/� q�i�� \� \ �'�,�`:-" ,_gin• i `f\ o-"� �^ ''✓l � ' � \ 1ly� ."� �-♦\ �. .�� ' \ �.'� nom; � '�'�I � Q ' 1' {�,il � ' �-;�f � � ter.. i •., a 17 I �. i� � 'j•' Zgz r. a a J M✓ J, �d ---� � 10 S VI Q La (n l Ll dxz I' •1 ww, �..s�r-I j l I r € o O W I'I 5 eJ ryii l j jJa. W --------------- CL r lcn I FF � .k �a�w, II��'�e- -III 'I 4•~j♦♦ I ri. IU.,I.� � Dt CPO Ll i, �� 7 l Clsl ,8 '(' 4r I 04 Mir 1 / auto/ Zia INN, oll Mus 0 MAP 12 :�� _ -r ii V / l!� •� /// Nal 8 � `��\ �� \�1�.y" �'��► ��},�.�i`>"�' :��\ •� �•�/'fir n / a 1 - '� �' _� , .. C.�� w. ��'\'r... • J�II i ,Y��• Irl I� � ,I� .•I c I z0 Z CL W Q Z m p W Z p_' tQ Vl W W CXZ omm Q tocr O CL r _ DJI IL I S�3 � I , OuVj 10 FIX R �\ W .... -_,' �A wti vtin All w•.'v L• 0000w�.w� RG w� gallon -i..�`�unllf,rrnnrlfnxgr... •/�, �•,� _ • I I I/A�, ol ~r� -WlW \ `/\� ,$\ Ax fUl�L�� v a a l.J ow _ pfp 9 W aJ=Z '1 PJ ('Iyi-�: aW 'I ��; , \ •�"� Coo �%11I� I � i � � ji Ilk Ir J \J•` 11 a�\'�`'?�� ?7}��r��1��.�'S��9' V ...ru' ✓r I III I