HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/15/1998, 1 - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE HEARING OFFICER'S APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT, A 100-98; PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL, 3566 SOUTH HIGUERA, SUITE 100; C-S ZONE. council M �. �=�s 99
j acEnaa Report
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
0
FROM: Arnold Jonas,Community Develo went Director
Prepared By: John Shoals,Associate PlanneW
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission action denying an appeal and upholding the Hearing
Officer's approval of Use Permit,A 100-98; Private Industry Council, 3566 South Higuera, Suite
100;C-S zone.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Draft Resolution "A" denying the appeal, and upholding the Planning Commission and
Hearing Officer's action.
DISCUSSION
Project
The Private Industry Council (P.I.C.) wants to establish a one-stop career center in conjunction
with the State Employment Development Department (E.D.D.) and other local agencies within
the existing P.I.C. offices. In order to establish the career center use in the C-S zone, the
P.I.C. must obtain approval of an administrative use permit from the City. Administrative Use
Permit (A 100-98) was approved by the City Hearing Officer in June of 1998, and the Planning
Commission, on appeal, in August of 1998. The City Council is being asked to consider an
appeal of the Planning Commission's action denying the appeal the Hearing Officer's
decision, and approving the administrative use permit.
Backsround
Beginning in October of 1997, this project has been in the City's planning process for more than
10 months. The proposal to establish a one-stop career center use (with employees from the
P.I.C., E.D.D. and other agencies) at the existing P.I.C. offices has been thoroughly reviewed by
City staff, the Planning Commission, City Council and interested parties. Counting the
scheduled City Council meeting, this project (in one form or another) will have been involved in
five public hearings and three appeals. Following is a brief summary of past actions taken on the
project.
The project was originally part of an application requesting a text amendment to the General Plan
Land Use Element that was needed to process the P.I.C.'s request to expand its office to include
13 government employees from E.D.D. and the Social Services GAIN program. In February of
1998, the Planning Commission denied the proposed General Plan amendment finding it to be
inconsistent with the General Plan. That Planning Commission action was appealed to the City
Council by the P.I.C. In March of 1998, the City Council denied the General Plan amendment,
but adopted a finding that the one-stop career center use was minor, incidental and ancillary to
P.I.C. in performing its primary functions, and is a permitted use with the approval of a use
permit. In May of 1998, the P.I.C. filed an application for a use permit to establish a one-stop
career center at P.I.C.'s existing office. In June of 1998,the City Hearing Officer approved the use
permit(A 100-98)with findings and conditions. Citing a lack of onsite parking, the neighboring
property owner (Carolyn Larson, Trustee of CL II Intervest) appealed the Hearing Officer's
Council Agenda Report
A 100-98 3566 South Higuera
P.I.C. Appeal Page 2
decision to the City Planning Commission. In August of 1998, the Planning Commission
unanimously voted to deny the appeal and uphold the Hearing Officer's decision to approve the use
permit. That Planning Commission action is now being appealed to the City Council.
A detailed chronology of the City actions on the one-stop center is contained in the Planning
Commission staff report dated July 22, 1998 (Attachment "G") and the applicant's letter of
September 1, 1998(Attachment"D-2").
Planning Commission Action
The proposed project was reviewed by the City Planning Commission on July 22, 1998, and
August 12, 1998. At those meetings, there was extensive discussion on parking related issues.
Specifically, the Commission's primary focus was on: establishing a parking requirement that
matched the use's parking intensity; making sure that the applicant provides sufficient parking to
meet the use's parking demand; and reducing the possibility for parking conflicts between the
proposed use and other Campanile building tenants as well as Tenwise Park (adjoining
commercial property owned by the appellant).
On a 5-0-1 vote (Commissioner Ashbaugh was absent and Commissioner Whittlesey refrained
from participation due to a potential conflict of interest), the Planning Commission denied the
appeal, upholding the Hearing Officer's approval of the project, with findings and conditions.
The Commission action requires the P.I.C. to: maintain the employee ratio (60% P.I.C.
employees and 40% other agency employees) as specified in the City Council finding, and to
submit an annual report of employee operations; submit a Trip Reduction and Parking
Management Plan showing how overflow parking will be handled; obtain a written agreement
securing a minimum of 40 spaces for off-site employee parking, with shuttle service for
employee safety and convenience; and designate five spaces for short-term parking to insure the
availability of onsite client/customer parking. In addition, there is a requirement for a one-year
use permit review, in which the Hearing Officer may modify, add or delete conditions, or revoke
the use permit. A copy of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 5232-98 is included as
Attachment"E."
Draft minutes from the Planning Commission's August 12 meeting are included as Attachment
"F." Minutes from the July 22 meeting are contained in Attachment "G." Attachment "D-2" is
a letter from the applicant which summarizes the events and conditions of approval for the
establishment of a one-stop career center. Thus far, the P.I.C. has agreed to all conditions of
approval placed on this project.
Appeal Filed
Carolyn Larson, Trustee for CL II Intervest, is appealing the Planning Commission's decision
because she believes that there is a lack of onsite parking at the Campanile Building which will
be a detriment to the existing businesses on the adjoining property (Tenwise Park). In addition,
she has expressed concerns regarding the proposed off-site parking claiming it to be unsafe and
inconvenient for P.I.C. employees. A copy of the Letter of Appeal is included as Attachment
4CC17
A. Onsite Parking
The appellant is concerned that there is not enough onsite parking to accommodate the Private
Industry Council's existing parking demands and the anticipated parking demands of the
proposed career center use. The appellant claims that the 89 parking spaces that the P.I.C.
Council Agenda Report
A 100-98 3566 South Higuera
P.I.C. Appeal Page 3
actually needs does not include the proposed expansion to include the 26 to 34 more employees,
trainees and customers, and that the career center use will have a minimum need of 123 parking
spaces. She concludes that the P.I.C. is currently allocated 50 parking spaces at the Campanile
Building, and that the addition of 40 more spaces would only make 90 spaces available to the
proposed career center use. Based on these figures, the one-stop career center use will have a
parking deficiency of about 43 spaces, and would not have adequate onsite parking.
On August 31, 1998, Lee Ferrero, President and Chief Executive Office of the P.I.C., submitted
a letter in response to Mrs. Larson's letter of appeal (see Attachment "D-1"). Mr. Ferrero's
letter clarifies that there are currently 27 P.I.C. employees at the site, and that there will be a total
of 39 employees (including 12 employees from E.D.D. and other agencies) at the one-stop
center. According to Mr. Ferrero, his stated need of 89 spaces for the one-stop center is based
on 39 spaces for employees and 50 spaces for client parking.
The P.I.C. is allocated 53 of the 86 spaces available at the Campanile Building. A breakdown of
parking by tenant is provided in the Planning Commission Staff Report of August 12, 1998
(Attachment "G"). With the requirement to provide a minimum of 40 off-site parking spaces,
the one-stop center would have 93 spaces available for its employees and clients, which would
satisfy the project's parking demand.
There has been extensive discussion on the proposed use's parking requirement (based on City
standards) and its parking demand. This discussion has often resulted in some confusion in
defining the use's classification (type of use) and establishing a parking requirement which
accurately reflects the use's actual parking intensity. For example, the P.I.C. has been classified
as a jobs skills training center with the parking requirement of a traditional office (one space per
300 square feet of floor area); however, recent information suggests that P.I.C.'s parking
intensity is closer to an office use with meeting rooms, where the meeting rooms have a parking
requirement of one space per 40 square feet of floor area. Through the planning and appeal
process, the Planning Commission was able to establish an acceptable parking requirement (89)
for the proposed career center use, and to impose appropriate project conditions to insure that
parking impacts are minimized or eliminated.
B. Off-site Parking
Pursuant to City Zoning Regulations, the Community Development Director may allow some or
all of the required parking to be located on a site different from the use. City Code requires that
off-site parking be within 300 feet of use and not separated from the use by a feature which
would make pedestrian access inconvenient and hazardous. The appellant maintains that the .
applicant's proposal to establish an off-site parking lot at the Hind Building is inconsistent with
the City's parking requirements as the lot is more than 300 feet away from the property and is on
the other side of South Higuera Street. Many of the appellants questions are answered in the
applicant's letter of August 31, 1998 (Attachment"D-1").
City staff and the Planning Commission agreed that the off-site parking would be acceptable as
long as there is a shuttle service available to the employees. It should also be noted that
Planning Commission approval requires that the P.I.C. obtain a written agreement securing the
40 required off-site spaces prior to issuance of a building permit and occupancy by the
employees from the E.D.D and other agencies. Failure to comply with this condition would
result in a revocation of the use permit.
�-3
Council Agenda Report
A 100-98 3566 South Higuera
P.I.C. Appeal Page 4
FISCAL IMPACTS
None
ALTERNATIVES
1. The City Council could adopt draft Resolution`B"upholding the appeal and denying the
Use Permit. If the Council denies the project, it must establish the appropriate findings.
2. The Council could approve the appeal and modify the Hearing Officer's findings and
conditions to include additional requirements for the use.
3. The City Council may continue action with specific direction to the applicant and staff.
Attachments:
Attachment"A" -Draft Resolution"A" (Deny Appeal)
Attachment`B" -Draft Resolution`B"(Uphold Appeal)
Attachment"C" -Letter of Appeal
Attachment"D-1" - Lee Ferrero letter dated August 31, 1998
Attachment"D-2" -Letter from Cannon Associates and the P.I.C., September 1, 1998
Attachment"E" -Planning Commission Resolution No. 5232-98
Attachment"F" -Draft Minutes from Planning Commission, August 12, 1998
Attachment"G" - Planning Commission Staff Report of August 12, 1998, includes:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report of July 22, 1998.
2. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of July 22, 1998.
Attachment "A"
Draft Resolution"A"
RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE HEARING
OFFICER'S APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT, A 100-98, ALLOWING THE
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL TO CREATE A ONE-STOP CAREER
CENTER USE AT EXISTING OFFICE AT 3566 SOUTH HIGUERA.
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission conducted regular
public hearings on May 22, 1998 and August 12, 1998, for the purpose of considering an appeal
of the Hearing Officer's decision to approve a use permit to allow the Private Industry Council to
establish a one-stop career center use, in conjunction with the State of California Employment
Development Department(E.D.D.) and other local agencies, at the existing P.I.C. offices at 3566
South Higuera; and
WHEREAS, on August 12, 1998, the City Planning Commission denied said appeal,
upholding the Hearing Officer's approval of use permit, A 100-98; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's action was appealed to the City Council on
August 20, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 15, 1998, and
has considered testimony of interested parties including the appellant, the applicant, the records
of the Planning Commission hearings and recommendation, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Action: The appeal 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 15th day of September, 1998.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Acting City Clerk Kim Condon
APPROVED:
7i
OM Je y C�: orgensen
A.4,MZ4
l'6
Attachment "B"
Draft Resolution"B"
RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
ACTION DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE HEARING
OFFICER'S APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT, A 100-98, ALLOWING THE
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL TO CREATE A ONE-STOP CAREER
CENTER USE AT EXISTING OFFICE AT 3566 SOUTH HIGUERA.
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission conducted regular
public hearings on May 22, 1998 and August 12, 1998, for the purpose of considering an appeal
of the Hearing Officer's decision to approve a use permit to allow the Private Industry Council to
establish a one-stop career center use, in conjunction with the State of California Employment
Development Department (E.D.D.) and other local agencies, at the existing P.I.C. offices at 3566
South Higuera; and
WHEREAS, on August 12, 1998, the City Planning Commission denied said appeal,
upholding the Hearing Officer's approval of use permit, A 100-98; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's action was appealed to the City Council on
August 20, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 15, 1998, and
has considered testimony of interested parties including the appellant, the applicant, the records
of the Planning Commission hearings and recommendation, and the evaluation and
recommendation of staff.
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1.Action: The appeal is hereby denied.
SECTION 2. Additional Conditions: The use permit application shall be subject to the following
additional conditions:
Council specifies conditions to be used
�-7
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15th day of September, 1998.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Acting City Clerk Kim Condon
APPROVED:
City Attorney Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
/'0
Aug-20-98 07 : 55P San Roque Vet. Hosp_ 805 569-4087 P . O1
Aug-13-98 12:43P City or SLO-CD Dept.
805 714 _ 7173 P.02
�r
of san WIS OBISPOc
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
In accordance With the appeals procedures as authorized by Title, 1,Chapter 1.20 of the
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, the undersigned hereby appeals from the decision of
San Luis Obispo Planning C'OmmiAMM on August 12, 1998
which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for submitting the appeal. Use additional sheets as needed.)
This appeal to the PIC expansion,is on the grounds of lack
of adequate parting facilities on-site at the Cappanile Building.
Their overflow is detrimental to the existing businesses on the
adjoining property, Tenvise Park. When their parki g lot is full
their customers, eta, park at Tenvise Park. hr. Frrero, of PIC,
has been stating -the need for 50 parking places, but at this
Commission Hearing confirmed it is really 89 parking places needed.
This current need does not include PIC proposed expansion including
approximately 13=17 additional . employees of other agencies. 13-17 -
more employees means a minimum of 13-17 more customers. The additional -
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with: CONTINUED PAGE 2----
San Luis Planning Commission on August 12, 1998
Name/Department (Date)
Appellant: CL II Intervest Box 3990,Santa Barbara 93130
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
(805)569-3828 (805)569-3828
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative: Carolyn Larson, Trustee Box 39909Santa Barbara293130
Namelfitle Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
For Offid;r use Only:
Calendared for �E I /298
Q City Attorney
City Administrative Officer AUG 2 n fggg
Copy to the following department(s):
1SLO CITY CLERK
,Tse -9
P wr Fax N to 7671 vatr��
Fr
Original in City Clerk's Office G,
Aug-20-98 07 : 55P San Rrnue Vet. Hasp. 805 569-4087 F -02
kGE TWO. August 19, 1998 continued, APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL , regarding PIC Expansion.
nployees plus customers,trainees. etc,will be a minimum of 28.34. Add this number to the existing 89, that Mr. Ferrero
tall&adllNffed to the City Planning (after diligent questioning by the Planning Commission's Moderator). Adding the
I minimum and 89 together, PIC needs a minimum of 115 parking spaces,which it does not have on-site at the Campanili
each new employee.from the other organizations such as EDD, brings in more than one customer, (which is reality). or
ere is a workshop or career training seminar which adds EDD, GAIN, etc,there are certainly more than the minimum of 21:
iditional persons present. Using the more 34 increase for new employees and their customers, plus the 89 PIC presently
:es,equals a minimum need of 123 parking spaces. PIC is only allotted 50 spaces at the Campanile. Even with additional
f-site parking of 40 more spaces,that makes only 90 available. g0 is only one more than PIC uses now, wi out the EDD
-iday.
PIC uses
is the space
er over
ncies. The overload the entire parking aths already the Campanile. Whee. re are the rest o 9 e Campanof the 88 ile tenants and theaces available at ir customers
le
is space �C
,pposed to park?
The proposed off-site parking, at the Hind Building, is beyond the minimum of 300 feet distance and it is on the other side
f South Higuera, a four lane roadway which carries a minimum of 30,000 speeding vehicles each day, and this nurttber
lcreaseseactlday. When the remodel of upper Higuera takes place it will increase even more rapidly.
PIC is proposing a shuttle service to shuttle employees back and forth between the rear of the Hind Building and the
:ampanile Building, if Greg Hind consents to the renovation of his parking lot, entrance and mit driveways(one is unpaved),
ghting, bus stops, bathrooms, insurance, etc, and rents to accommodate PIC, EDD, etc, per the government requirements.
'he Hind Building presently has vacancies. Will the Building parking requirements be met when those vacancies are filled 7
iow can Greg Hind give PIC a long-term parking contract when he has vacancies that may need the parking in order to rent i
The shuttle service is NOT real life. In real Ilfe, employees come and go at different hours of the day, and they are not
going to stand around and wait for a shuttle service. They are going to walk across the four lanes of So.Higuera,which does
JOT have a crosswalk between the Walter Center,on the North side of Prado Road, and Tank Farm Road on the South.
'o use a crosswalk would mean a PIC. EDD, etc, employee would have to walk several blocks North or South on the Hind
3uilding side and back again on the Campanile side of South Higuera. This is a fatality vomiting to happen, because they
ire going to cross illegally, and more than one time per day. The City of San Luis Obispo, and others involved, are liable
or the Health, Safety and Welfare of its citizens, and putting parking on the other side of South Higuera is jeopardizing too
&any people's safety. Not only the safety of PIC employees is at stake, but the safety of the 30,000 plus drivers per day.
they would have to contend with the illegal foot traffic on this busy roadway. To approve this bad solution, to an already bad
gad problem,would set a precedent against the safety guidelines already set by the City. The City would then have to
rontinually try to solve, and police, all the businesses who will then apply for an"pxception to the 300 foot, same street-
side" City Safety Guidelines. The existing Safety Guideline is a wise safety rule, because is takes into consideration the
human element of wanting to use the quickest, but not always the safest, routes across busy roadways.
As an example of foot traffic and safety, look at the hazards of the downtown foot traffic, where the vehicles are not going
engin close to the high rate of speed the vehicles travel on South Higuera. Pedestrians cross anywhere they please.
1 was told yesterday that PIC is looked on favorably because they supply cheap labor to some locals. They could do that
ft0m a government zoned location a lot more efficiently and without stress to the neighboring businesses and their
employees . These neighboring businesses are required by government to pay the going labor rate. Most businesses
struggle to meet payroll. In my husband's business, labor expenses are more than a fourth of the gross income, rent takes
one sudh, supplies and Inventory take a fifth, not including advertising, legal, bookkeeping, utilities,telephones, maintenance
etc,etc,which are all major expenses, plus income taxes. This does not leave much take home pay and most small
businesses are not any different in their struggles to meet expenses. We don't need government taking our parking too.
PIC states the"rent is more reasonable at the Campanile'. Aren't the extra expenses of renting off-sits parking, providin,
shuttle services, extra Insurance, etc, going to eat up any savings that are possible 7 It appears as if the PIC location is a
case of someone wanting to be the"Big Fish"in a little pond, instead of a Little Fish in a big pond of government agencies.
CIry0fsLO.pic.98,2.X1s
4G, FREE, August 11), 1908 continued, APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL, regarding PIC Expansion.
Attached,you will find my last two letters of Appeal to the Planning Commission. In these letters it explains, in detail,
by the City should CONFIRM,CONFIRM and keep confirming what they are being told by PIC management. Especially,
nee one of the Planning Commission's own members learned first-hand that the number of PIC employee figures was
deed misrepresented by PIC management. They don't have 25, like they have been telling the City. The Commissioner
as told, by a PIC employee,"39"(which is a minimum, because Lee Ferraro personally told me 45). After the discovery,
IC management started using the 39 count This misrepresentation,all by itself,should make the City aware that they
sed to hear what the neighboring business people have been saying and take heed of the accuracy of PIC's representation:
r more succinctly, their inaccuracies. To get approval', evidently it is a case of "tell the City what it wants to hear".
We wish PIC well, in a government tocabon, where their employees, and others, are safe. We are defending our private
roperly and the welfare of our tenants from government encroachment,which could cause the failure of tenant businesses
they don't have their parking without fighting for it on a daily basis. PIC management claims they get along well with all of
ie tenants at Tenwise Park, except Don Owens, of Owens Music. The tenants of Tenwise Park don't want PIC in their
parking lots, but just because they aren't rude enough to throw Lee Ferraro out when he calls on them does not mean they
oorove of PIC invasion of their parking. Don Owens is picked out, by PIC management, because he is vocal enough, due
Aug-20-98 07 : 58P San Rt^-rue Vet. Hosp. 805 569-4087 P .01
,GE TWO, August 19. 19M continued. APPEAL TO THE CIN COUNCIL , regarding PIC Expansion.
1ployess plus customers,trainees. etc•will be a minimum of 26-34. Add this number to the existing 89, that Mr. Ferraro
M&ed ltted to the City Planning(after diligent questioning by"Planning Commission's Moderator). Adding the
minimum and 89 together,PIC needs a minimum of 115 parking spaces,which it does not have onside at the Campanili
mach new employee,from the other organizations such as EDD, brings in more than one customer, (which is reality), or
are is a workshop or career training seminar which adds EDD, GAIN, etc,there are certainly more than the minimum of 2t
iditional persons present Using the more 34 increase for new employees and their customers. plus the 89 PIC presently
as,equals a minimum need of 123 parking spaces. PIC is only allotted 50 spaces at the Campanile. Even with additional
f-sits parking of 40 more spaces,that makes only 90 available. g0 is only one more than PIC uses now, iw thout the EDD
id the other agencies. The overload is already extreme. Today, PIC uses 89 of the 8B spaces available at the Campanile,
is space over the entire parking at the Campanile. Where are the rest of the Campanile tenants and their customers
apposed to park?
The proposed off-site Parking, at the Hind Building, is beyond the minimum of 300 feet distance and it is on the other side
South Higuera, a four lane roadway which carries a minimum of 30,000 speeding vehicles each day, and this number
creassa each day. When the remodel of upper Higuera takes place it will increase even more rapidly.
PIC is proposing a shuttle service to shuttle employees back and forth between the rear of the Hind Building and the
ampanile Building, if Greg Hind consents to the renovation of his parking lot, entrance and altit driveways(one is unpaved),
3hting, bus stops, bathrooms, insurance, etc, and rents to accommodate PIC, EDD, etc, per the government requirements.
he Hind Building presently has vacancies. Will the Building parking requirements be met when those vacancies are filled 7
ow can Greg Hind give PIC a Iona-term parking contract when he has vacancies that may need the parking in order to rent
The shuttle service is NOT real life. In real life, employees come and go at different hours of the day, and they are not
ping to stand around and wait for a shuttle service. They are going to walk across the four lanes of SO.Higuera, which do.
IOT have a crosswalk between the Walter Center, on the North side of Prado Road, and Tank Farm Road on the South.
o use a crosswalk would mean a PIC, EDD, etc, employee would have to walk several blocks North or South on the Hind
Wilding side and back again on the Campanile side of South Higuera. This is a fatality waiting to happen, because they
,re going to cross illegally, and more than one time per day. The City of San Luis Obispo, and others involved, are liable
or the Health, Safety and Welfare of its citizens, and putting parking on the other side of South Higuera is jeopardizing too
nany people's safety. Not only the safety of PIC employees is at stake, but the safety of the 30,000 plus drivers per day.
hey would have to contend with the illegal foot traffic on this busy roadway. To approve this bad solution, to an already bad
rad problem,would set a precedent against the safety guidelines already set by the City. The City would then have to
vntinually try to solve, and police, all the businesses who will then apply for an"exception to the 300 foot, same street-
:ide" City Safety Guidelines. The existing Safety Guideline is a wise safety rule, because is takes into consideration the
iuman element of wanting to use the quickest, but not always the safest, routes across busy roadways,
As an example of foot traffic and safety, look at the hazards of the downtown foot traffic, where the vehicles are not going
peen close to the high rate of speed the vehicles travel on South Higuera, Pedestrians cross an ere they please.
I was told yesterday that PIC is looked on favorably because they supply cheap labor to some locals. They could do that
from a government zoned location a lot more efficiently and without stress to the neighboring businesses and their
employees. These neighboring businesses are required by government to pay the going labor rate. Most businesses
struggle to meet payroll. In my husband's business, labor expenses are more than a fourth of the gross income, rent takes
one sirdh, supplies and inventory take a fifth, not including advertising, legal, bookkeeping, utilities,telephones, maintenance
etc, etc,which are all major expenses, plus income taxes. This does not leave much take home pay and most small
businesses are not any different in their struggles to meet expenses. We don't need government taking our parking too.
PIC states the 'rent is more reasonable at the Campanile". Aren't the extra expenses of renting off-site parking, providii
shuttle services, exb insurance,etc, going to eat up any savings that are possible ? It appears as if the PIC location is a
case of someone wanting to be the"Big Fish"in a little pond, instead of a Little Fish in a big pond of government agencies.
Aug-20-98 07 : 58P San Roque Vet- Hosp. 805 569-4087 P . 02
DAGt.. ,HREE, August 19, 19M continued, APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL, regarding PIC Expansion.
Attached, you will find my last two letters of Appeal to the Planning Commission. In these letters it explains, in detail,
nhy the City should CONFIRM, CONFIRM and keep confirming what they are being told by PIC management. Especially,
since one of the Planning Commission's own members learned first-hand that the number of PIC employee figures was
indeed misrepresented by PIC management They don't have 25, like they have been telling the City. The Commissioner
was told, by a PIC employee,"39"(which is a minimum, because Lee Ferraro personally told me 45). After the discovery,
PIC management started using the 39 count This misrepresentation, all by itself, should make the City aware that they
need to hear what the neighboring business people have been saying and take heed of the accuracy of PIC's representations
or more succinctly,their inaccuracies. To get approval, evidently it is a case of "tell the City what it wants to heat".
We wish PIC well, in a government location, where their employees, and other:, are safe. We are defending our private
property and the welfare of our tenants tram government encroachment, which could cause the failure of tenant businesses
if they don't have their parking without fighting for it on a daily basis. PIC management claims they get along well with all of
the tenants at Tenwise Park, except Don Owens, of Owens Music. The tenants of Tenwise Park don't want PIC in their
parking lots, but just bemuse they aren't rude enough to throw Lee Ferraro out when he calls on them does not mean they
approve of PIC invasion of their parking. Don Owens is picked out, by PIC management, because he is vocal enough,due
to his own past personal experiences with PIC management. He was a tenant at the Campanile. so knows PIC well.
To his credit, the visiting Planning Commissioner also learned the Children's Gym has classes of 90 students. This is
also an overload, because they only have 20 parking spaces required by the City at the Campanile Building,and there are
only Be spaces In all of the Campanile, They also overflow into Tenwise Park, N we don't constantly work at keeping them
out Why should we private sector businesses have to waste our valuable work hours, and overtime, protecting our own
pro--'v III We pay the property taxes II I
We should have the right to the quiet enjoyment, and the growth, of our own businesses without interference of agencies
who belong in government zoning. The PIC belongs in the Wafter Center, along with the rest of the government agencies,
where true One-Stop shopping really exists, instead of separating agencies by two blocks where there are no connecting
sidewalks, nor even existing sidewalks on the undeveloped Kuden farmland property. People have to walk on the street or
in the weeds along the Kuden property between Walter Center and the Campanile Building. Another large section of the
Kuden property is a strawberry farm, so it is muddy there, and people must walk on the street.
When faced with convenience or safety, human nature always chooses convenience, because no one thinks an accident
will over happen to them. However, it will happen if the City allows off-site parking on the opposite side of South Higuera,
and the City is liable for that decision.
Sincerely,
Caro4Lan, e
Tenwise Park
CUdg
Certified#194159-880 and FAX to City Council on 8-20-98
cc: Planning Commission, Ron Whisenand,Zoning.
enc: July 22, and August 12 talks presented to The Planning Commission, including PIC Highlight page and 4 overviews.
Aug-20-98 07 : 58P San R- nue Vet- Hosp. 805 569-4087 P .03
CL it INTERVEST " BOX 3990 * SANTA BARBARA. CA ' 93130
San Luis Obispo Planning Commission meeting,Council Chamber,
390 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
August 12, 1998
Regarding A•100-98, Private Industry Council Expansion
Myself and many others have spoken or written the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the expansion of government
funded agencies into areas that are not zoned for government. We have researched and reported the happenings at the
Campanile Building, and PIC, to the City of San Luis Obispo, Government overflow is slowly and insidiously killing off
existin working small businesses, Isn't job training PICS motive? Why do they risk the possibility of killing off existing
jobs by their overgrowth into the retail sections of town and encroached on a private business's parking lots.
It is a credit to this Commission that some of it's members have taken it upon themselves to go and see and research
on their own, without PIC management pre-warned and at their elbow. This allows the Commission to see what is really
going on at the Campanile Building. The Commissioners who went saw for themselves, what we have been telling The City
for so many months. We thank the Commissioners for taking the time to check the credibility of tigures they have been
given by the Applicant. We people in the private business sector hope the City will continue to confirm the details they are
given by PIC.
Regarding PIC Shuttle proposal. Shuttle Services d¬ stand by and wait for passengers. Passengers stand by and
wait for shuttle services. This is not a pleasant experience, especially when the weather is bad, and the prediction is it will
only last long enough for the City to say*Yes'*to PIC and its expansion. What is the price of a bus ticket ? All the free
bus passes in the world will not change parking problems caused by PIC and the Campanile Building. Both the Children's
Gymnastics and PIC were not required by the City to have as much parking as The City requires other businesses to have.
Keeping in mind that Mr. Ferraro said he was negotiating with me for my parking lots, he was not. Then, he said he was
negotiating with the Eagle's Lodge for their parking, he was not. Then, he said he was negotiating with John Kuden for
parking on his property, he was not. Now. PIC says they are negotiating with the Hind Building for their paiki„g lot.
Please Commission members and other entities of The City of San Luis Obispo, CONFIRM, CONFIRM, and keep on
confirming on a regular basis, by asking others who are not the PIC or Campanile managements. One year is too long
to let PIC go without checking on them. Six months is too long.
The parking requirements for PIC, and the rest of the Campanile, should be according to Zoning Scenario e 3 . 'Phe only
way to protect the employees of PIC and the surrounding neighborhood's Health, Safety and Welfare, is to require PIC
and the rest of the Campanile the same parking as required of other businesses. Inadequate parking and people jammed
in small offices cause unsafe working conditions, dangerous traffic flours and congestion. Congestion and people looking
for parking, instead of looking for many small children coming and going in the parking lots from the Children's Gymnastics
People keep saying the PIC is"unique". Government funded agencies are not unique. Approximately 50%of all the
employees in the United States are employed by governrr}ent agencies. The less than 50% who remain .are mostly
err_ li ovees of private businesses. The"UNIQUE"individual is the person who owns his own small business and employs
other people. He gets up early every morning, and the majority go to work before their employees get there. Most don't
take an hour lunch, they eat on the job or grab something fast while their employees are gone for their hour lunch. These
business owners work until closing and watch their employees leave for home while they still have many hours of work
ahead of them in order to keep their businesses viable. The private business owners, in today's society, cannot lust rur
their businesses to the advantage of their customers, like the good ole days. They have to spend a good percentage of
their time(time they used to spend building a good business) now filling out government forms and answering to more
and more government agencies. The private sector business owner is the one who is "Unique", because he is a rarity.
Not only is he unique, he is a HERO. A Hero who supports his family by his ovrfi wits, and pulls himself out of bed early
each morning, usually a minimum of six days a week,to provide the jobs for the people who come in at nine o clock and go
/— til
Aug-20-98 07 :59P San Re-que Vet . Hosp. 805 -69-4087 P.04
- i
home.at five. He doesn't teach his employees how to work for more government agencies. He teaches them how to be
sell-enterprising, by example, because that is the only ways private small business owner and his employees can survive
in today's fierce business competition with very large retail stores and government subsidized entities. The owner of the
SLO gym arrives between four and fire a.m. to start the day's work, and like most of we small business people, it takes
both husband and wife to cover the long work hours and if successful,to oversee the growing number of employees. My
husband and I personally each work a minimum of 10 hours per day, and usually it is 12 to 16. As 1 work to appeal PIG
today, I worked a full day at my business(until 7:30 p.m.)and now it is 2:20 a.m. Yesterday I worked a full business day
and the extra work lasted until 5 a.m.. This leaves most sole-proprietors with little time to sleep. We aren't complaining
because that is the way it is in order to get:all of the work done, However, it would sure be easier with less government.
After this meeting, I have an hour's drive home yet tonight. It is a good thing I am a tough Iowa farm girl and was raised with
the soWproprietor hard-work ethic,which enables me to realize, and appreciate, the hard work my tenants are putting into
their small businesses.
What are all the people who now work for government agencies, and the rest of us, going_ to do when we want to buy a
nice lamp, make our own stained glass windows and artwork, buy the best toot supplies, buy a musical instrument, or a
piece of furniture, or work out our body to keep it healthy(these are the seven small businesses at Tenwise Park today).
What are we going to do when we wake up to find that all of the small private businesses we love to use, because they give
us good caring service, have gone the way of the Good Post Otfice. Who is going to fik•your plumbing or teach your child to
play the piano? The sole owner won't be there. The government pushed them out of retaiVoning areas, because the
Government wants to make more room for more government funded agencies. They already have Tri-Polar, government
zoning,from North of the Walter Center to Prado Road and clear over behind the drive-in theatre, plus other areas in town.
Government employees like_ the free enterprise system, just like all of us do,. but they forget they have to protect us.
bf to WE ARE THEM. We are a dying breed. Where will we all have to so to shop when free enterprise and the
sr.. +niers are gone; and more disappear each year because we can't handle all the government requirements and the
new pressures that are added every month; because Big Brother-is putting us all in a keyhole, at the same time they are
justifying someone's job, plus more and more tastes? It costs an average sole proprietor a minimum of:?0 to 30;000 dollars
to move his business, and that doesn't include the loss of business until he gets re-established In another location. More
often than not, that amount of money is too much fora sole owner to bear, so tie closes his business and goes to work fnr
a large corporate store, because that is the only choice he has in order to support his family. Where will you shop tot that
"something special" when were gone? Big stores don't care about you and your special needs? You have to take or
leave whatever they stock on their shelves- be damed with the quality, the merchandise comes.automatically from some
centrally stocked warehouse. The only way a sole-proprietor can stay in business is if he stocks quality merchandise.
PIC training center, with it's classrooms, libraries, workshops, computer labs and many small offices, take up large
amounts of parking, besides being a fire disaster waiting to happen. Parking, which still does NOT contain adequate
Van Accessible Handicapped parking. PIC is government funded and should be in government zoning and not make
the private sector fight to preserve our own parking lots. Leave the small business person alone so they can do their.
everyday "Hero" work for all of us who believe in free enterprise and want our children and grandchildren to live in a
country run by small business, not government BIG business. PIC.is supposed to be training people to go out into the
ordinary business world and make a living.Will there be a small business world when the government overgrowth gets done
with shoving us out of our own private, retail zoned, parking lots? PIC overgrowth is just the tip of the iceberg, and their
off-site parking RUSE is the hidden part of the berg. If the City approves PIC and their"shuttle", which may not even be
within the required minimum footage from the Campanile Building, the test of the iceberg will slowly come to the surface,
out of the sight of The City. The City cannot afford to police everything, so they should look wisely at their decision making
process in order to prevent ugly problems later. Prevention is worth a pound of cure 1 Current problems exist that could
have been prevented in the first place if the Campanile building construction and parking requirarnents had followed the
gu;aglines equal to those The City requires of other construction and their future usage. One of the major problems is the
1 )duction for shared parking. How can PIC share parking that does not exist. It is already all used. A full glass Is a
furl grass, no matter how you view it. AND,they are sure NOT going to sharp my parking lots. I pay the property taxes 1
If the Commission allows this One-Stop center and leaves the policing to PIC, it is like leaving the Fox to guard the I len
House. It doesn't work on the farm and it won't work here. The burden will fall on the seven small bubinesses at Tdnwise
Park, because the City has better things to do than police their daily"exceptions to the rules". The burden should be
on
S
Aug-20-98 07 : 59P San R�,hue Vet . Hosp. 805 569-4087 P . 05
he City for the protection of evervo+te's Health, Safety and Welfare equally, but how can that be done, they are too busy
hnd there Is not enough City money to go around to cover policing all the exceptions and varying rules the City is making
or different projects throughout the City and the Campanile Sui dine too. What were the requirements and stipulations
when the Campanile Building was built?What was the stated usage in order to build such a large building with little parking
m such a long narrow lot? There had to be some exceptions there too. If the City administers requirements equally and
ises the actual figures(M estimates from PIC management )of the employees, customers and other participant records
)f PIC it will undoubtedly see the estimates are different than the actual figures.The same discovery that the Commissioner
bund when he made the surprise visit to PIC. The City will not be short-changed in everyday policing expense, because
:hey will leave the everyday police work to the seven existing small businesses at Tenwise Park. This is short-changing
Drivate business again, not only because of the police work, but because of the loss of our parking to the Campanile&PIC.
;am pleading with the City to protect our small businesses and deny the expansion of PIC, because the accuracy of the
PIC figures is questionable at best 19 computer stations, equals 19 computer users, no matter what the City is being
told. You can cover it with sugar, you can bake in the oven, but what you put in, is what you expect to get out If they
don't need 19 computer stations and all of their meeting rooms,then that is the space they should be using, instead of
expanding into NEW space. Who do they think they are kidding, they are using all 19 computer stations and the maximum
of all of their rooms, or they wouldn't be wasting the space on them, and applying for much NEW space. If this Commission
decides to give PIC their expansion, then in all faimess to the surrounding businesses, PIC should be required to go by the
Parking Scenario 0 3, because that is the stark reality of what is really going on at PIC and the Campanile Building.
V,
The Hind Building is at 3765 So. Higuera, two blocks south of PIC, but in order to get to PIC you would have to find a cross-
walk to safely cross South Higuera. Most people don't leave enough time to gat to work and wait for a shuttle too. They'd
rather sleep that extra half hour and walk the two or more blocks, but there is not a crosswalk that handy on So.Higuera, so
they would do what all of us do-cross wherever they wanted without a crosswalk. There is no way that this plan would not
increase the ansate foot traffic crossing South Higuera.
Thank you for your time and diligence in your decision. I pray it will benefit small private businesses, because government
funded entities already have the benefit of yours and my unlimited tax dollars to help them. They have their own zoning and
should be there, so Commercial/Service, retail zoning, is available for private businesses,where zoning is there to protect
private businesses from government funded entities encroaching upon the neighboring properties and the neighborhood.
The Campanile was built for the zoning that it was assigned, or it would not have been approved by the City to be built
so strangely on such a confining piece of land.
Sincere[ ,
Carolyn L mon,Trustee
Tenwise Park
REBUTTAL : Regarding the Mediation the Planning Commission suggested I have with Mr. Ferraro. My major concern is
for my tenants,who pay for their parking rights with their Rents. I would not mediate away their parking. It is vital to their
businesses, and small businesses work hard. They need help to be successful, so 1 defend their parking to the best of my
ability. Mr. Ferraro tells the City PIC has 25 employees, he tells me 45, the Commissioner visits and finds 39, so now he is
found out, he says'99". The City needs to CONFIRM.CONFIRM and keep confirming what PIC is telling them. I will say
what I said to Mr. Ferrera when he first approoached me regarding my tenants parking lots. I said"NO"then, I am saying
"NO"today, and I will say"NO" tomorrow. Any other item of possible mediation is between PIC and the City.
H6
Aug-20-98 08: OOP San Roque Vet. Hasp. 805 569-4087 P . u6
CL II INTERVEST ' BOX 3990 ; SANTA BARBARA, CA * 93130
San Luis Obispo Planning Commission meeting, Council Chamber,
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
July 22, 1998
Regarding A-100-98, Private Industry Council Expansion
I am the Trustee of Tenwise Park which shares a common driveway across from the PIC and the Campanile Building.
Being an absentee Landlord does not afford me the opportunity to observe the PIC and Campanile on a regular basis.
A good percent of the observations that I bring to this Commission are those of my tenants. They are quite concerned
for the Health, Safety and Welfare of their businesses and their San Luis customers. Contrary to what PIC claims,the
PIC and other Campanile businesses and their customers do frequently park at Tenwise Park. My tenants call often
complaining that the PIC and the Campanile Building are taking up their customers parking places again.
r
In PIC's FAX to the City, on June 19, 1998, they clearly show Tenwise Park as part of the PIC parking plan,
labeled, "ANALYSIS OF TENANT CUSTOMER PARKING AND ONE-STOP SCHEDULES;" See copies of the PIC
parking plans effeched. On another page, labeled as the"Site Plan l Parking Layout-Campanile Building"they clearly
wrO-'bossible parking"on the right hand side of the page. That is my orovertv they are labeling possible parking'.
W ie PIC verbally expresses, and what their intentions are, are two entirely different things. It is a case of "listen to
what I say but don't pay attention to what I do". The'denial is a diversion tactic. When they write out their intentions on
their purposed plans and include my orooerty I take that as a serious threat to invasion of the private property of
Tenwise Park.
Mr. Ferrero, of the PIC, was being facetious when he states, in his July 1st letter to the City, "We recognize Mrs.
Larson's letter was prepared during a time of concern and emotion. This is a politician diversion statement.
Protecting one's property rights is an extremely important issue. It is an issue most wars are fought over, and by some
very intelligent men. Many confrontations have occurred at the Campanile and Tenwise Park parking lots (at sometime
involving guns and three police cars at once). Yes, the PIC has, and is, causing myself and our tenants a great deal
of concern and emotion. This is our livelihoods we're talking about, along with all the other Safety concerns we have.
Mr. Ferrero tries to make light of it by calling attention away from the Health, Safety and Welfare issues. but San Luis
citizens have a big stake in protecting themselves. Our San Luis cu mere, depend upon the right to our private
parking lots, without the daily harassment from neighburs taking up lheii spaces. Myself, my insurance curnpdoy, and
our tenant's insurance companies do not want the liability and responsibility that comes with neighboring businesses
using our private parking lots. The Health, Safety and Welfare of the Campanile customers and employees are at stake
also. There are manv.Safety factors to consider. Some more evident than others.
It is evident because of the complaints of our tenants, it more traffic is added at the PIC and the Campanile Building it
Y411 become more stressful. Mr. Ferrero claims there will rot be more traffic. That is another fallacy that the PIC is trying
to create. He wants us all to believe that by adding EDD, GAIN and other Social Services to the PIC that traffic will be
reduced. We weren't bom yesterday. It doesn't take much to figure out when you add employees to a one on one
service,.you add customers. Not only within the adjoining properties, but into the traffic flow of South Higuera Street.
Tr will be many more left hand turns into the street, a street that already carries more than 30,000 vehicles daily and
a, /good rate of speed. This additional left hand traffic is a fatality waiting to happen. This is a direct Health, Safety
and Welfare issue, affecting each and everyone of us who travels on South Higuera. Everyone realizes what ONE-STOP
means. If you go to the grocery store you stay a half hour and you leave the parking lot. If you go to the grocery store
and the drug store is next door, you stay an hour. Add each new store to a ONESTOP shopping area and you add
TIME and parking congestion because no one is leaving within a half hour anymore. This congestion is reflected in the
street as well as the parking lots. There is not enough space unless someone leaves, so to find a space everyone is/tel 7
Aug-20-98 08:01P San Rr,-ue Vet . Hosp. 805 569-4087 P .07
driving around, or parking illegally causing the expense of the City Police intervention. This costs San Luis taxpayers.
The Campanile Building is 33,000 square feet on approximately half the lot size of Tenwise Park. See the attached
schematic. Tenwise Park has only 28,000 square feet of buildings. Also, Tenwise Park has a driveway and parking
between our two buildings. The PIC and the Campanile have only one walkway• no driveway between their two
buildings. Vehicles have to drive the entire length of both Campanile buildings to get to the back and rear side.
On the schematic,Tenwise Park is labeled C-S. The Campanile buildings are to the South with the lines labeled
"A 1 00•ll'8". Since the time this schematic was submitted by the PIC,they have relabeled and numbered ALL the
parking spaces, creating reserved parking at the Campanile Buildings, With reserved spaces, people hunt for any
parking space when those spaces available are not labeled for them. At that point,Tenwise Park is the handiest
solution to a Campanile customer's immediate parking problem, because we do not have reserved spaces, except for
Tenwise customers in front of the front building. During a recent mid•aftemoon my husband and I stood in the parking lot
behind the San Luis Gym with our architect and the owner of the San Luis gym. During the half hour we were there I had
to ask at least 10.12 people who were parking their cars and heading for the Campanile to please not park at Tenwise.
They acted angry and affronted, like our parking lots should belong to them. Our parking lots are clearly labeled as to
"NO PIC, NO CC GYM, NO CAMPANILE", but they parked there anyway-challenging us to have them towed.
Tenwise Park has plenty of parking if the Campanile and PIC would stay out of our private parking lots.
We are also concerned for the Health Factors because we constantly find very personal debris on our premises from
the Campanile Children's Gym customers; dirty and full disposable diapers is the most trelfuent of the debris
The PIC reserved parking and possible expansion not only pushes other Campanile customer.into Tenwise parking,
but it also creates a heavier traffic flow onto South Higuera, off of the common ingress and egress. Because of the
Campanile Building's long and narrow design their customers do not drive in one way and out the other. They enter and
exit from the same driveway or cut across my property. The Campanile overload creates a cramped environment which
not only affects the Health, Safety and Welfare issue of the Campanile and Tenwise Park, but for the public at large at
South Higuera Street.
The Zoning Officer misunderstood my statement regarding chains(breakaway gates)to protect the Southern ingress
of Tenwise Park The chains/gates would only be across the jagress of Tenwise parking lots, which is not common with
PIC or the Campanile. This may be a possible solution to keeping PIC out of Tenwise parking, along with fencing the
back parking lot behind the San Luis Athletic Club, so the Campanile could not park their cars and easily step over the
curb to enter the Campanile property. BUT, I should not have to consider this. Government funded iacdities should be in
government zoning where the Safety restrictions are already required. The government zoned Walter Center has a
large vacancy factor and that is where PIC, EDD and GAIN belong. Not in a retail area taking away retail parking.
Mr. Ferrero states he has tried to negotiate with me. He would like people to believe I am being unreasonable in
protecting my own property rights and those of my tenants and their San Luis customers. It is our Constitutional Right
to protect our property. There is one very simple solution, "PIC and Campanile stay on your side of the common
driveway-the North side of the common driveway does not have any parking spaces that belong to you and I repeat for
the umpteenth time,"you will not be given permission to use ANY area at ANY Time in Tenwise Park. You will be towed."
Keeping the Campanile out of our parking lots is certainly affecting my tenants and my personal Health, Safety and
Welfare. I am tired of the two hundred mile round trip to defend my property. We should not have to spend our valuable
time, health and emotions fighting to preserve the real and business property we oar the taxes on. We're fighting for
the Health and Welfare of our families, our San Luis customers, San Luis citizens at large and also the customers of the
Campanile bemuse they have the distress and expense when their vehicles are towed, plus the added street congestion,
plus the other Safety concerns.
Even without the PIC expansion, the Campanile Building should be required to provide the same type of stoplights, bus
stops and other Health, Safety and Welfare factors that the City required of the Walter Center when it put in government
funded businesses. These are the essentials of Health, Safety and Welfare for ail the citizens of San Luis Obispo, and
these requirements should be equally administered, including the proper number(per 2flia syuaie footage)of Van
Accessible Handicapped spaces. Government funded businesses in the capacity of helping the jobless should include,
above average, the number of handicapped individuals. These persons, as well as those who are not handicapped, need
/'l0o
Aug-20-98 08:01P San Roque vet_ Hosp. 805 569-4087 P . 08
he proper Health, Safety and Welfare factors, including fire corridors wide enough for two wheelchairs to pass each
Aher. The PIC has many small offices squeezed into a maze pattern that would be very difficult to escape from alive
I there were a fire. See the floor plan o/the PIC attached. These offices would create an extremely difficult maze to
negotiate even if you had two feet to run and knew the pattern of the maze by heart(which a customer to the PIC would
tot be familiar with). Most employees could not draw the maze with their eyes shut even though they work there
wery day. Put several wheel chairs, people on crutches and people running and crawling through smoke and fire in the
naze of the PIC's many small offices and there is a multiple death disaster assured,
The City should require a"maze test"fire drill with walking and wheelchair customers who are not accustomed to
:o the PIC maze of offices. AND,then add all the other requirements the same as any other governrnerrt funded facility.
Such as 1:100 parking for office space, Instead of the 1:300 that the PIC is allowed. Another inequity for the private
sector,who must provide 1:100 for office space of such high customer usage. If the PIC had been required to meet this
standard they would not be in the Campanile causing the Campanile overloading to the distress of the neighborhood.
The Campanile Building or The City should provide a traffic count at the ingress and egress of the Campanile Buildin fl,
onto South Higuera, in order to determine the traffic problems the current PIC and its expansion will have on South
Higuera . Traffic Health, Safety and Welfare requirements for the PIC should be met equal with the Walter Center. fl i;
traffic count should include Tenwise Park's entrances on the South so the City can see the true reality of the parking
rage situation caused by the PIC overloading of the Campanile Buildings. For instance, the San Luis Athletic Club at
Tenwise Park Is required to have 32 parking spaces, yet the Campanile Children's gymnastics (athletic club) is only
required to have 20. This is also a zoning inequity because children can't drive themselves Sr take a bus or public
transportation like the adults at the San Luis Athletic Club can. The Bus Stop is at the Walter Center two blocks to the
North and with NO continuous sidewalks or crosswalks in between the Bus Stop and the Campanile Building. Children
at the Children's gymnastics are dependent upon the parents participation and this takes parking. Parking that is taken
fror Children's gymnastics by the overloading of the PIC. In equity, the Children's gymnastics should be required by
The , to have 42 parking places, because they haye 12,500 square feet, which is 2,500 square feet MORE than the
SLO Athletic Club at Tenwise Park. Instead, The City gave the Children's gym a parking concession of more than half
off,which is costing Tenwise Park customers, because the Campanile takes up our customer's parking spices.
Let me give you an example of the Safety, Health and Welfare issues The City should consider. Several years ago my
husband sat on the Board for a Unified High School District. A young woman, who was a ward of The State, decided
she wanted to cross the four lane roadway to access the other side. This woman was hit by a car. The owner of the
School Property was sued and the owner of the roadway was sued. The owner of the property, who housed the school,
was found negligent and the owner of the roadway,The State of California, was also found negligent because they had
NOT provided the proper Health. Safety and Welfare features to prevent an accident from happening to the wornan when
she crossed the roadway. All the Board Members of the School were named in the lawsuit, including my husband. The
Board Members, in this instance,were not found to be negligent. The government is responsible for its citizens, no
matter their lack of good sense. This could just as well have been South Higuera and The Campanile Building who
houses a government funded facility.
In dosing, these parking, street and potentially dangerous fire problems with the overloading of the Campanile is
not only affecting the Health, Safety and Welfare of Tenwise Park and the Campanile, but all the citizens of San Luis
Obispo, because the citizens have to bear the expense of administering , policing, traffic control, the Health, Safety
and Welfare issues, including the liabilities that are going to arise when there is improper and inequitable expansion
within the City.
Carolyn Larson, Trustee
Tenwise Park i �/
Aug-20-98 08:02P San Rr-iue Vet. Hosp. 805 569-4087 P .09
rt), 19 '99 07=45M I WE. rnDUSTR'r CCINCIL
HIGHLIGHTS ,
' ONE-STOP CAREER CENTER
AND
PARTNER AGENCY INFORMATION
RATIO OF PIC EMPLOYEES TO "OTHER AGENCY" EMPLOYEES
PIC: 70%
OTHER: 30% (MINOR, INCIDENTAL a ANCILLARY)
RATIO OF PARKING SPACES (53)TO SOU ARE FOOTAGE (12,600 SQ-'FT-)
ACTUAL RATIO: 1 SPACE PER 239 SQ, FT.
STANDARD RATIO: 1 SPACE PER 300 SC. FT.
OCCUPANCY ANALYSIS
-INCREASED PRESENCE OF PERSONNEL, COMBINED TASKS, TRIP REDUCTION.
-LESS THAN FULL-TIME ASSIGNMENTS AND JOB SHARING.
,OUTSTATIONED
DIVERTED TO OUTS A7 GRANDE,
SMO MESA
SITES.
-CUSTOMER
ANALYSIS OF TENANT CUSTOMER PARKING AND ONCE-STOP SCHEDULES:
ran L . IN C MAQ AINwtle Club(Q s' 13vm1
8-9 a.m. IW 12 Noon-1:30 P.M. WA d-5 P.M.Central rg9ast Gmnastics School
G'
School Year: 3:30-9:00 P.M.
Sommer Session: Noon-9:00 p.m. �1C
a
uo,tp..y +rrreet6 a QUO ch Mamma
8 a.m. to 4 P.M. (mgMing drop-offs. aftarnoon waits... arking charges for delays). V"
One-Ston S le
-Delay morning warkshcps to 9:30 a.m.-12 Noon (work with SLOAC customers).
.EDD Customers tend to arrive and leave between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. t�7
Workshops scheduled around other peak use hours...off site if needed as backup./
-Lunch breaks from 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. (vm*around gym).
-one-Stop staff schedules Dob sharing, alternate schedules — arrive late, leave early).
The businesses In the complex and their customers have a generally predictable
rhythm and once those are known. appointments and scheduling are tailored to fit Al
around those needs. A�
�-zo
Aug-20-98 08:02P San R^que Vet. Hasp. 805 •69-4087 P . 10
J
P F
1 '
3 ^ �
C-S-s pp
i
1001,
1100,
IJI
� 0
r:e!.
r�� , ,• y
w
d t •r
•�F.;ir r r rf TAl tj 1 SE p �/
Cl
.� f ! r r • a -\.
.� ijtl•.o •
�o01169
• t•V e r
d .slf
\`
.
%19"
.� T•.CT 10• 110 M
�•rli •�� RANAOA DRIVi
mg-R
Aug-20-98 08:03P San Roque Vet. Hosp . 805 569-4087 P . 11
r _
ATTACHMENT 1
I +
+ +
+ 6 +
' HWY 101
, I
cog
I
+
r ,
J
00&lL J pJ
J
+ f
, r
I
1p
V•Z`'A ,' ---�- -GR ADA- --- -
/
J A, ,
♦
r
. +
r- - IND::
if+ ) I
VICINITY MAP 3566 South Higuera
A 100-98
,
/-,22
Aug-20-98 08:03P San R que Vet. Hosp. 805 569-4087 r _ l�
I
tI I__-1�-�13°
100
ILD
L�
�J
�p I
_I rL
_I r
I .
L J
I .. L — J
3odceet.J Coin Oym,w,ia(Cc O r app,
XOO f I s,�,ofl.la
I.. I H I TN,S
I L__J IS
zostwteluae Imallalou Tum(PMTp�wrs�
(�
�p7.m3tMa�,tetq ImP� y L�5 J w A y
}' 1
. _ r ° Pie,
I ~ - 91
° L J
I ,
y I rte- TI�Ix
s
WOO
� I j�o3-20UPrl.eu Indmn3 Coundl(PICT D � — 0 x
-4 — 1
J �-IONPd.eu Indutlry Lewd)(PIC) 1 No
Wfk�.
,l r _ 1
lAUtuy comd)(PIC)
_ J
III H
(not ro scale)
fRCA/fA�O7
Slta. PIn� / ParK►A� l�your — LOAP4 11 i. �i
�-,Z 3
1
. I ,
1
i-z
M' Attachment "D-1"
P
y
August 31, 1998
Mr. John Shoals, Associate Planner
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
RE: APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL—ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT
(FILE#A 100-98)—PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL EXPANSION.
Dear John:
Each time the appellant to this project has submitted a letter to the City of San Luis Obispo, stating
various concerns, it has routinely been our practice to provide a reply. Our purposes for doing this
have been twofold: (1)to address any inaccuracies, and (2)to maintain the integrity of the public
record. The one exception to this practice was with regard to Ms. Larson's letter of 8/12/98 to the
City Planning Commission, because we frankly did not know how to address her concerns, which
seemed to stretch far beyond the scope of this issue. Nothing contained in this letter will be
responding to earlier letters from the appellant.
Passages in Ms. Larson's letter of appeal (dated 8/19/98)which we will address are expressed in
Italics. Our responses to those passages will follow.
Mr. Ferrero, of PIC, has been stating the need for 50 parting spaces, but at this Commission
Hearing confirmed it is really 89 parking places needed This current need does not include PIC
proposed expansion including approximately 13-17 additional employees of other agencies.
In earlier meetings, we believed the 53 available parking spaces allocated to the PIC,would be
ample for the expanded needs. It became apparent to us,though, as more hearings took place and as
concerns grew with respect to parking capacity,that we should either relocate group workshops or
relocate employee parking to another location with dedicated parking for that activity. We decided
it would be easier to relocate the employee vehicles. Furthermore,the additional employees are
included in that total number already.
Planning Commission Chairman Senn, at the August Ie public meeting, did specifically ask me
exactly how much parking the one-stop would really need. My response was 89 spaces. We
arrived at that number by generally adding the total number of spaces at the Campanile Building
(53)to be used for customers (individual and/or group) and the total number of spaces at a separate
location (40, at the Hind Building or another nearby location)to be used for employee parking. We
believed then, and we still do,that by accepting this condition we will be able to meet our business
needs and also prevent parking conflicts with any neighboring tenants in any area near the
Campanile Building.
3566Sotd 1f*w Strut ■ Saite 100 ■ San Luis Obispo ■ Cafifomia ■ 93401 ■ (805)761-2200 ■ Fax(805)5414117
1-A50P I
Page 2
Today, PIC uses 89 of the 88 spaces available at the Campanile, one space over the entire parking
at the Cwnpande.
The PIC,today, does not use anything more than the 53 spaces currently allocated. Except for some
rare and brief occasions, there is an ample supply of vacant parking spaces available each day, all
day at the PIC.
There are presently 27 PIC employees assigned and working at the South Higuera location, which
leaves 26 vacant parking spaces for customers. When the other agencies join the PIC to create the
one-stop center,they will bring an additional 12 employees, increasing the total number of
employees to 39. This is the number we have used as the basis for the 40 additional, offsite parking
spaces.
13-17 more employees means a minimum of 13-17 more customers.
We do not know how Ms. Larson arrived at this formula. For instance, let's look at the present PIC
employees only: of the 27 total PIC employees,their responsibility with respect to working with
customers, or working independent of customers, plays out as follows:
• Six counselors and one eligibility technician work with customers, one-on-one.
• One trainer and two other coordinators work with small groups, on a scheduled basis.
• Seventeen staff do not work at all with customers(63-percent of the PIC staff in SLO).
• Four other PIC staff are located in Paso Robles(2) and Arroyo Grande(2).
The 12"other agency" employees will work as follows:
• Nine staff function as counselors,working with customers one-to-one.
• Two staff supervise those staff and other projects(but not customers).
• One trainer will work in combination with the PIC trainer.
At no time ever, has every individual who works with customers, each had a customer at all times
each day. Anyone could certainly create various scenarios but since everything is handled on a
scheduled appointment basis, we can control the flow of people. We also know that the building
does not have the capacity to hold 53 customers(one per each parking space), nor will we have the
staff to help those numbers of customers. The fact is, we will never see numbers of that magnitude.
The proposed off-site parking, at the Hind Building, is beyond the minimum of 300 feet distance and
it is on the other side of South Higuera...
This is correct,but because we have offered to establish a shuttle service for all the one-stop
employees(and we will offer incentives for use of public transportation wherever it is reasonable
for a given worker),this should not be a problem.
How can Greg Hind give PIC a long-term parking contract when he has vacancies that may need
the parking in order to rent?
Mr. Hind has considerable parking capacity,which more than satisfies the standards for the type of
use and zoning found, with his property. In addition, he wants to create additional parking capacity.
If he completely filled his building with tenants as he expects to, he has indicated there would still
be ample capacity. _ '
/-026
Page 3
The shuttle service is NOT real life. In real life, employees come and go at different hours of the
day, and they are not going to stand around and wait for a shuttle service.
We do not know anything for sure, with respect to how this solution will work. We also have not
determined whether to utilize the Ride-on method (which is less desirable) or to lease our own van,
which can run"on demand"(which is more desirable). Two local auto dealerships are considering
the possibilities of donating a van, or we might just lease a vehicle. A PIC trainee could become an
employee of the one-stop to work at the office and also be a driver(this would create one new job in
the community). There are so many ways to address an issue such as this one,that we do not
consider this as an insurmountable obstacle. Rather,we view it as a rather creative solution.
I was told yesterday that PIC is looked on favorably because they supply cheap labor to some
locals.
This is not a fair statement,it is certainly not an educated viewpoint, and the historical evidence is
contrary to the comment. Furthermore,this remark has virtually no bearing on the issue at hand.
PIC states the "rent is more reasonable at the Campanile." Aren't the extra expenses of renting
off site parking,providing shuttle services, extra insurance, etc., going to eat up any savings that
are possible?
The cost of rent at the Campanile building(combined with the absence of triple net costs and with a
long-term lease)when combined with other costs as noted by Ms. Larson, is still very competitive
when measured against past and current market prices. In addition,the performance and attitude of
the Campanile landlord and property management company is of the most professional level I have
ever experienced in my twenty-five years of work in this business.
They don't have 25 (employees, as noted on page three in the first paragraph, like they have been
telling the city. The Commissioner was told by a PIC employee, "39" (which is a minimum,
because Lee Ferraro (Ferrero)personally told me 45. After the discovery, PIC management started
using the 39 count.
First of all,the employee that the Commissioner talked to on July 21"was a"temporary"employee
with San Luis Personnel,who was working the receptionist desk in the career center. We do not
fault him for attempting to answer the question,whether or not the visitor identified himself. It was
a simple misunderstanding and could have happened to anybody. That's beside the point. The fact
is the PIC has 27 employees(not 25,not 39, and not 45)at this facility. With the one-stop center,
the number will then climb to 39 workers(12 new people).
To get approval, evidently it is a case of"tell the city what it wants to hear. "
This statement is inaccurate, unfair, and careless. In truth,the plans we had 16 months ago when
we began this process have been altered considerably since that time, in order to be responsive to
the wishes of the City Planning Commission, City Council, and City Community Development
Department staff. During that period, no less than seven conditions have been added to this project
which we could have rejected in turn or accepted as presented. We have chosen the latter, and if
this means we are making adjustments which appear to exhibit actions"the city wants to hear,"then
so be it. Our goal is to establish this one-stop career center, and to accomplish this in a proper,
responsible, and legal manner.
In closing, we continue to communicate with all the tenants in this grouping of buildings, including
those tenants of the appellant. At no time have we threatened them, or felt threatened. No problem
has ever been so great,that we could not sit down and work out a solution on the spot for the
I—oO
Page 4
purpose of avoiding a repeat occurrence. It does concern us that correspondence from the owner of
the Tenwise Park tends to be personal in nature, and that our offer to seek independent mediation
(as recommended by chairman Senn of the Planning Commission) was ignored. Fortunately, all of
the local tenants are cordial and cooperative.
My apologies for the length of this letter, and we remain available for clarification or further
information. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Lee Ferrero
President& Chief Executive Officer
C: JB Enterprises
Cannon Associates
Attachment`°D"
Attachment "1 " M .. F c:. l :1:, PE
>u ,.,,:. G Mi k :. .i. AIA. AICP
amon September 1, 1998
A S S O C I A T E S p
S RFCpwFO
Arnold Jonas, Community Development DirectorCity of San Luis Fp
4 Obispo 990 Palm Street coNiry f(U�o 99�
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401YF�0P i,�°0
MFNT
.:.L; ;L
Dear Mr. Jonas:
This letter summarizes the chronology of events and the conditions of approval for
the establishment of a One-Stop Center at the Private Industry Council (PIC). The
following timeline shows PIC's willingness to address concerns immediately as they
arise and provide meaningful solutions:
Chronology of Events
• May 6, 1997: The Private Industry Council met with the Community
Development Department staff to explain their plans for the One-Stop Career
Center. City staff was encouraging of the concept and suggested a General Plan
Amendment as the proper course.
• October 17, 1997: PIC filed for a General Plan Amendment to enlarge the social
services component of the City's public facilities area.
• January 21, 1998: The Airport Land Use Commission continues the hearing on
the General Plan Amendment. The Commissioners expressed a concern that PIC
and the One-Stop Center should be defined as a"school".
• February 11, 1998: The City Planning Commission denied PIC's request for a
General Plan Amendment. The Planning Commission felt that enlarging the
social services area would be inconsistent with the"tri-polar policy"as originally
envisioned in 1977. PIC appealed that decision to the City Council.
• February 18, 1998: The Airport Land Use Commission determined that the
Center was not a"school"and ruled that the land use is compatible with the San
Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan.
• March 17, 1998: On appeal of the Planning Commission decision, the City
Council made the following determination:
"Because of the unique program provided by PIC, the proposed use of a one-
stop career center in conjunction with the State of California Employment
Department(provided it does not exceed a ratio of 60%PIC employees and
40%other agency employees), is a minor, incidental, ancillary, function of
PIC in carrying out its primary mission, and is therefore, consistent with the
tri-polar policy, and is a permitted use in the zone upon approval of a use
permit„ 1976
�-�z9
lamon
ASSOCIATES
Page 2
• May 22, 1998: PIC filed an application for Administrative Use Permit(AUP).
• June 19, 1998: The Hearing Officer approved the AUP request with conditions.
• June 29, 1998: The adjacent property owner(Carolyn Larson) filed an appeal of
action taken by the City Hearing Officer. The appeal was forwarded to the
Planning Commission for review.
• July 22, 1998: City staff recommended denial of the appeal. After much
deliberation, the Planning Commission deadlocked at 3-3 resulting in a
continuance to August 12, 1998.
• August 12, 1998: The Planning Commission agreed unanimously that PIC's
proposed parking management and trip reduction plan adequately addressed their
concerns. Project approved.
• August 20, 1998: Appeal filed by Carolyn Larson of the Planning Commission
decision .
PIC has responded positively at each stage of the hearing process. As new concerns
surface, PIC has proposed a solution. PIC is now subject to the following conditions
in order to establish the One-Stop Center.
1. Submit an annual employee report to verify the ratio of 60%PIC and 40 %
"other"employees.
2. PIC shall submit a Trip Reduction and Parking Management Plan. The plan
shall include a schedule of group events, measures to accommodate overflow
parking,parking reduction strategies, and public transit incentives.
3. All One-Stop employees shall park their vehicles at the Hind Building, or
comparable site. A written agreement shall be provided verifying that 40 off-site
parking spaces have been secured.
4. PIC shall provide shuttle transportation service to all One-Stop staff, to and from
the off-site parking area, on a daily basis.
5. All One-Stop customers who reside north of the Cuesta Grade shall obtain
services at the One-Stop Career Center located on the Cuesta College North
County Campus in Paso Robles.
6. PIC shall provide five parking spaces on site for short-term (20-minute) parking.
/-30
larmon -
A S S O C I A T E S
Page 3
The Private Industry Council has sought cooperation from the outset of this process
and has worked with the City and its neighbors to create a harmonious situation. The
off-site employee parking and shuttle proposal is a valid parking management and
trip reduction plan. By consolidating programs,the operation of the One-Stop
Center will reduce vehicle trips for job training services. As a safeguard, the use
permit is required to be reviewed in one year to validate if the proposed parking
management plan has been effective.
Please include this letter in the report to City Council for their consideration. Call us
if you need any additional information or have any questions.
Sincerely,
v
Doug Q19vidson,AICP Lee Ferrero
Senior Planner President and CEO
Cannon Associates Private Industry Council
971r21Ar c1.dx
.'� rui11111C11► G
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 5232-98
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
August 12, 1998 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application A 100-98, Private Industry
Council, applicant.
ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT REVIEWED:
A 100-98: Review of an appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision approving an expansion
of P.I.C. to create a one-stop career center in conjunction with the State E.D.D. and other
local agencies.
DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development Department, City Hall.
GENERAL LOCATION:
3566 South Higuera Street
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT:
Service Commercial
PRESENT ZONING:
C-S, Service Commercial.
WHEREAS, said Commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and studies
made by itself, and in behalf of testimonies offered at said hearing has established existence of the
following circumstances:
I. One March 17, 1998, the City of San Luis Obispo City Council adopted Resolution No. 8781
with the finding that the one-stop career center is a unique program, and that the use of a one-
stop career center in conjunction with the State of California Employment Development
Department (E.D.D.) and other local agencies (provided it does not exceed a ratio of 60%
-3z 1K
Resolution No. 5232-98
A 100-98
Page 2
P.I.C. employees and 40% other agency employees) is a minor, incidental and ancillary
function P.I.C. in carrying out its primary mission, and is consistent with the tri-polar policy of
the social services node.
2. The one-stop career center use has a parking requirement of 77 spaces which exceeds the 53
existing spaces designated for the use. The uses's parking requirement will be meet by
providing an additional 40 to 50 spaces for off-site employee parking and implementing trip
reduction and parking management strategies.
3. The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working at
the site or in the vicinity.
4. The use is appropriate at the proposed location as it is compatible with and complimentary to
the existing uses in the Campanile Building. In addition, the County Airport Land Use
Commission has determined that the use is compatible with the San Luis Obispo County
Airport Land Use Plan.
5. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, with mitigation measures, was adopted for
General Plan Amendment GP 145-97 on December 17, 1997. The proposed use was
anticipated at the time of environmental review and no further review is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the appeal of Administrative Use Permit A
100-98 be denied thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's approval of Administrative Use Permit
A 100-98 subject to the following conditions:
1. The one-stop career center shall not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C. employees and 400/a other
agency employees. The applicant shall submit an annual report of employee operations,
including the number of employees by agency and the anticipated employee hours of work at
the site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
2. To ensure that there are not significant parking impacts associated with group events such as
orientation workshops, the applicant shall submit a Trip Reduction and Parking Management
Plan for review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall
include: a schedule of group functions and events, demarcation of those areas reserved for
employee and client/customer parking; and how overflow parking will be handled. The plan
should also include automobile trip and parking reduction strategies such as carpooling, van-
pooling, bicycling and public transportation. For example, the P.I.C. and other agencies could
offer employees and clients incentives such as free bus passes and/or other compensation for
utilizing these resources.
/-33
Resolution No. 5232-98
A 100-98
Page 3
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall secure a written agreement for a
minimum of 40 parking spaces at the Hind Building, or a comparable site, for off-site
employee parking. For convenience and safety, a shuttle service shall be provided for
employees.
4. The applicant shall designate five spaces for short-term parking of 20 minutes to be clearly
marked with green curbing. The applicant shall be responsible for the monitoring and
enforcement of these short-term parking spaces.
5. The use permit shall be reviewed in one year (approximately August 12, 1999), or at any time
that reasonable written complaints are received by the City of San Luis Obispo. At the review
hearing, the Hearing Officer may modify, add or delete conditions, or revoke the permit.
Specifically, the Hearing Officer may direct the P.I.C. to explore the possibility of requiring
off-site workshops. A basis for revocation shall be failure to comply with the above-stated
conditions.
The foregoing resolution was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis
Obispo upon the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Ewan, Jeffrey, Marx, Ready, and Senn
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioner Whittlesey
ABSENT: Commissioner Ashbaugh
Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary
Planning Commission
MKS O5232-9R
/-3�
Attachment "F"
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
AUGUST 129 1998
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, August 12, 1998, in Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, California.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners John Ewan, Jan Howell Marx, Mary Whittlesey, David
Jeffrey, Paul Ready and Chairman Charles Senn
Absent: Commissioner John Ashbaugh
Staff
Present: Development Review Manager Ron Whisenand, Recording Secretary
Leaha Magee, Associate Planners Pam Ricci and John Shoals, and
Assistant City Attorney Gilbert Trujillo.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE MINUTES:
The minutes of July 22, 1998, were accepted as amended on Page 15.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no public comments.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 3566 South Hieuera Street: A 100-98: Appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision
approving a request to establish a one-stop career center in conjunction with other
local agencies and EDD; C-S Zone; Private Industry Council (P.I.C), applicant; Carol
/-3S
Planning Commission MinL
August 12, 1998
Page 2
Larson, appellant.
Commissioner Whittlesey refrained from participation due a potential conflict of interest.
Associate Planner Shoals presented the staff report and recommended denying the appeal.
thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision to approve the use permit with
additional conditions of approval.
There were no questions/comments the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Carolyn Larson, appellant, read a written statement into the record expressing opposition
to the proposal. She requested the Commission to protect small businesses and deny the
expansion of P.I.C.
Doug Davidson, Cannon & Associates, P.I.C. representative, stated Mr. Ferrero wrote a
letter to Ms. Larson to enlist support but never received a response. They have been
working on a parking management and trip reduction plan. He described the proposed
employee off-site parking, shuttling, and negotiations to lease 40-50 spaces at 3765 S.
Higuera. He asked the Commission to consider a requirement of 25 off-site spaces
reserved for employees- Parking Scenario #4. He noted a north county one-stop center
will be operating shortly and 40%of P.I.C. clients reside north of the grade. He
1-36
Planning Commission Min
August 12, 1998
Page 3
explained the goal of consolidating services and feels requiring off-site workshops would
be contrary to P.I.C.'s. He requested the Commission to deny the appeal and uphold
approval of the Administrative Use Permit with the revised findings and conditions.
Commissioner Ready asked how a recommendation of 40 off-site parking spaces would
effect the project.
Mr. Davidson urged consideration of 25 off-site spaces.
Commissioner Ready asked if there are 40 off-site available.
Mr. Davidson replied yes.
Commissioner Ewan asked if shuttle use has been discussed with staff.
Mr. Davidson deferred the question to Mr. Ferrero.
Lee Ferrero, P.I.C. CEO, reviewed his memo distributed to staff which outlined 13 key
events of P.I.C.'s efforts. The six conditions have been reviewed by P.I.C. and the off-
site parking will be supplied if required. He has a letter from Mr. Hinds confirming
discussions. The One-Stop Planning Committee which is comprised of agency
Planning Commission Mint
August 12, 1998
Page 4
representatives agrees with the off-site parking plan. He explained the benefits on one-
stop career/job placement training centers.
Chairman Senn asked how many P.I.C. on- and off-site parking spaces are specifically
needed to meet the demand.
Mr. Ferrero stated 89 spaces for employees and customers, based on the capacity of the
building.
Ms. Larson stated she is concerned for her tenants. They have paid for parking rights
with their rents. She doesn't intend to mediate parking away. She believes P.I.C. has
incorrectly stated numbers of employees and clients. Businesses cannot maintain their
businesses with out appropriate parking.
Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Ready moved to deny the appeal thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's
decision to approve the administrative use permit (A 100-98) subiect to the findings and
amended conditions on Paees 6 and 7 of the staff reportwith the modification to
Condition#3 to read: Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall secure a
�f
x-38
Planning Commission Min
August 12, 1998
Page 5
written agreement providing 40 spaces at the Hind Building, or a comparable site, for off-
site employee parking. For safety and convenience, a shuttle service will be provided for
employees. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ewan.
Commissioner Marx supports a larger number of off-site parking spaces.
Commissioner Jeffrey is comfortable with the proposal.
Chairman Senn asked if the permit will become effective only after P.I.C. provides the
prescribed parking.
Devel. Review Manager Whisenand stated the use permit will not be effective until all
conditions are met.
AYES: Commissioners Ready, Ewan, Jeffrey, Marx, and Chairman Senn
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioner Whittlesey
The motion carried 5-0-1. Commissioner Ashbaugh was absent.
2. 175 Hathway Avenue: A 75-97: Request for a one-year review and possible
r-39
Attachment "G"
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#
BY: John Shoals,Associate Planner MEETING DATE: August 12,1998
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Managq D
FILE NUMBER: A 100-98
PROJECT ADDRESS: 3566 S. Higuera(see Attachment"A')
SUBJECT: Appeal of Hearing Officer's approval of an administrative use permit to allow the
establishment of a one-stop career center in C-S zone.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision to approve the use permit
with additional conditions of approval.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission reviewed this project on July 22, 1998, and continued it to a date
certain so that detailed parking information could be submitted. Specifically, the Commission
requested that staff re-calculate the use's parking requirements to more accurately reflect the
proposed use's parking intensity. The Commission also directed City staff and the applicant to
develop a workable parking management plan. In response to the Commission's request, staff
has re-calculated the parking requirements for the proposed use based on the applicant's
proposed floor plan (Attachment "C"). In addition, the P.I.C. has submitted a proposal for
parking management and trip reduction to the site.
DISCUSSION
Parking
At the July 22 meeting, there was extensive discussion on: the proposed use's parking
requirement and parking intensity; the use of alternative parking requirements; the amount of
parking available to the P.I.0 and the other tenants at the Campanile building as well as the
Tenwise Center (adjacent property); the existing parking situation and past parking conflicts
between tenants at both buildings; and possible ways to reduce the project's potential parking
impacts to the site.
Parking Requirements and Parking Intensity
One of the primary questions that needs to be answered before the Commission can make a
decision on the project is: what is the appropriate parking ratio for the proposed one-stop career
center use? There has been much debate on whether the proposed use is an office, a government
office with meeting rooms, a specialized school, a jobs skills training center, or a combination of
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 2
these uses. Although the P.I.C. facility has historically been consider as an office use, there is
information that suggests that the proposed one-stop career center use may function as an office
with meeting rooms, which has a higher parking intensity (1 space/40 square feet) and
requirement than a conventional office (I space/300 square feet). In order to establish a parking
requirement that matches the use's parking intensity, the Planning Commission directed staff to
re-calculate the project's parking requirement based on actual use of the building. Section
17.16.060 of City Zoning Regulations gives the Planning Commission the authority to require
parking, in addition to City parking requirements, as a condition of use permit approval.
Using the applicant's proposed floor plan, staff developed four scenarios for the Commission's
consideration. Under scenario #1, the one-stop career center is defined as a 12,600 square foot
office type use with a parking requirement of one space per 300 square feet of gross floor area
(1:300 parking ratio). This scenario was the one used by the Hearing Officer in the initial
approval of the administrative use permit. Scenario #2 assumes that the use consists of 11,600
square feet of office space and a 1,000 square foot workshop/meeting room (1:40 parking ratio).
Under scenario #3, the use is comprised of 9,600 square feet of office space (1:300 parking
ratio), a 1,000 square foot workshop/meeting room (1:40 parking ratio) and a 2,000 square foot
library/resource area (1:40 parking ratio). Scenario #4 assumes that the use consists of 9,600
square feet of office space, a 1,000 square foot workshop/meeting room (1:40 parking ratio) and
a 2,000 square foot library/resource area (1:200 parking ratio). Table 1 (below) provides a
comparison of the parking requirements for each scenario.
Table 1
Proposed One-Stop Career Center Parking Requirements
Comparison of Potential Parking Requirement Scenarios
Parking Scenario#1 Parking Scenario#2 Parking Scenario#3 Parking Scenario #4
Use and Area spaces Use and Area spaces Use and Area spaces Use and Area spaces
(Parking Ratio) (Parking Ratio) (Parking Ratio) (Parking Ratio)
12,600 sf Office 42 11,600 sf Office 39 9,600 sf Office 32 9,600 sf Office 32
(1:300) (1:300) (1:300) (1:300)
1,000 sf Workshop 25 1,000 sf Workshop 25 1,000 sf 25
(1:40) (1:40) Workshop
(1:40)
2,000 sf Lib/Res. 50 2,000 sf Lib/Res 20
(1:40) (1:200)
TOTALS: 42 64 1 1 107 1 177
Under scenario#1, the proposed use would have a parking requirement of 42 spaces. Since there
are 53 spaces onsite that are assigned to this facility, the proposed use would meet its parking
requirement under this scenario. Under scenario #2, the proposed use would have a parking
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 3
requirement of 64 spaces. Scenario #3 has a parking requirement of 107 spaces and scenario #4
a parking requirement of 77 spaces. It should be noted that parking ratio (1:200) used for the
library/resource area in scenario #4 assumes that 10 of the 19 computer stations will be occupied
by clients throughout the day.
The Planning Commission must decide which of these scenarios is closest to the proposed use's
actual parking intensity, and establish a parking requirement for the project.
Overall Parking Requirement for Campanile Building
Concerned about approving a use that could potentially exacerbate an existing parking problem,
the Planning Commission asked staff to provide information on the parking requirements for the
existing P.I.C. offices, the proposed one-stop career center as well as for the other tenants at
Campanile building. This information is contained in Table 2 (below).
Table 2
CAMPANILE BUILDING PARKING
(With Scenario#1 Parking Requirement)
Scenario#1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Scenario#4
TENANT Parking Spaces Parking Spaces Parking Spaces Parking Spaces
Proposed Use 42 64 107 77
12,600 sf
Monterey Imports 5 5 5 5
2,500 sf
Clutch Masters 5 5 5 5
2,500 sf
F.I.T. 4 4 4 4
1,500 sf
C.C.Gymnastics 20' 20' 201 20'
12,000 sf
Total Spaces: 76 98 141 111
Actual spaces 86 86 86 86
provided on site
Parking Surplus +10 -12 -55 -25
or Deficit
Notes:1. Per City Approval#A24-95.Gyms typically have a parking requirement of 1:300 sq.ft.
Under scenario #1, the proposed use would satisfy City parking standards. However, it does not
account for the weekly workshops and classroom space that may generate an additional need for
onsite or off-site parking.
Under scenario #2, there would be an overall parking deficit of 12 spaces and a need for
additional onsite or off-site parking.
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 4
Scenario #3 would result in the site's overall parking being short by about 55 spaces, generating'
the need for additional onsite or off-site parking spaces. It should be noted, however, that this
figure does not take into account any shared use parking reductions for the site. Through the
administrative use permit process, the applicant could apply for a 10% parking reduction for the
project. Staff does not feel that this scenario is representative of the proposed use's parking
intensity even with weekly workshops.
Under scenario#4, the site's overall parking would be short by 25 spaces,generating the need for
additional onsite or off-site parking. It should be noted, however, that this figure also does not
take into account any shared use parking reductions for the site.
Parking Management and Trip Reductions
As shown in Table 2, the site could have an overall parking demand of between 76 and 141
parking spaces (depending on the parking scenario used by the Commission). There are
presently 86 spaces available at the site. With the exception of scenario #1, the project would
result in the need to provide additional parking to meets its parking demand.
Several possible ways to provide additional parking and reduce parking demand was discussed at
the Planning Commission meeting. Possible solutions include: development and implementation
of trip reduction and parking management strategies; the possibility of holding workshops off-
site; securing land for an off-site parking lot (for employee parking); and the designation of
short-term parking spaces.
A. Trip Reduction and Parking Management: The applicant's proposal for trip reduction and
parking management is outlined in Attachment "D." The P.I.C. is offering to do the
following actions to meet its parking requirement.
1) All One-Stop employees (P.I.C. and other agencies) will park off-site. P.I.C. is presently
in negotiations to lease 40-50 parking spaces at the Hind Building site, 3765 South
Higuera. For convenience, Ride-On Transportation will provide shuttle service for
employees.
2) With the opening of the North County One-Stop Center, there will be a significant
reduction on the number of vehicle trips made to this facility. According to the P.I.C.'s
records approximately 40 percent of its clients reside in North San Luis Obispo County.
If the P.I.C. is successful in leasing the 40-50 parking spaces at the Hind Building, the
proposed one-stop career center as well as the Campanile building will more than meet its
parking requirement, with the exception of scenario #3. This would also go a long way to
resolving the parking conflicts between the two buildings:
�-�3
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 5
To ensure that the project meets its parking requirement, staff recommends that the Planning
Commission approve the following condition of approval:
1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall secure a minimum of 40
parking spaces at the Hind Building, or a comparable site, for off-site employee parking.
Planning Commission staff report dated July 22, 1998
B. Off-site Workshops: One of the conditions of the Hearing Officer's approval is that the use
be reviewed, after one year, to determine if there is a need to hold workshops at another
location(off-site). Although the applicant has been responsive to holding off-site workshops,
they feel that this would be contradictory to the one-stop career center concept.
C. Short-term Parking: Commissioner Marx suggested the applicant may want to consider the
possibility of providing short-term parking to ensure that a specific number of spaces would
available on a regular basis. Staff believes that this is a good idea, and would be in support of
the Planning Commission incorporating the following condition.
1. The applicant shall designate five spaces for short-term parking of 20 minutes
(maximum)to be clearly marked with a green curbing. The applicant shall be responsible
for the monitoring and enforcement of these short-term parking spaces.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission may also consider the following three alternative actions.
1. The Planning Commission may approve the appeal, thereby denying the use permit for the
one-stop career center use. If the Commission denies the project, it must establish the
appropriate findings for denial.
2. The Planning Commission may approve the appeal and modify the Hearing Officer's
findings and conditions to include additional requirements for the use.
3. The Planning Commission may continue action. Direction should be given to staff and the
applicant.
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision to approve administrative use
permit(A 100-98) subject to the modified findings and revised conditions of approval.
Findines:
1. One March 17, 1998, the City of San Luis Obispo City Council adopted Resolution No. 8781
with the finding that the one-stop career center is a unique program, and that the use of a one-
stop career center in conjunction with the State of California Employment Development
Department (E.D.D.) and other local agencies (provided it does not exceed a ratio of 60%
P.I.C. employees and 40% other agency employees) is a minor, incidental and ancillary
function P.I.C. in carrying out its primary mission, and is consistent with the tri-polar policy
of the social services node.
2. The one-stop career center use has a parking requirement of 77 spaces which exceeds the 53
existing spaces designated for the use. The uses's parking requirement will be meet by
providing an additional 40 to 50 spaces for off-site employee parking and implementing trip
reduction and parking management strategies.
3. The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working at
the site or in the vicinity.
4. The use is appropriate at the proposed location as it is compatible with and complimentary to
the existing uses in the Campanile Building. In addition, the County Airport Land Use
Commission has determined that the use is compatible with the San Luis Obispo County
Airport Land Use Plan.
5. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact,with mitigation measures, was adopted for
General Plan Amendment GP 145-97 on December 17, 1997. The proposed use was
anticipated at the time of environmental review and no further review is required.
Conditions:
1. The one-stop career center shall not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C. employees and 40% other
agency employees. The applicant shall submit an annual report of employee operations,
including the number of employees b agency and the anticipated employee hours of work at
the site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
2. To ensure that there are not significant parking impacts associated with group events such as
orientation workshops, the applicant shall submit a Trip Reduction and Parking Management
Plan for review and approval by the Community Development Director. The plan shall
include: a schedule of group functions and events, demarcation of those areas reserved for
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 7
employee and client/customer parking; and how overflow parking will be handled. The plan
should also include automobile trip and parking reduction strategies such as carpooling, van-
pooling, bicycling and public transportation. For example, the P.I.C. and other agencies
could offer employees and clients incentives such as free bus passes and/or other
compensation for utilizing these resources.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall secure a minimum of 40 parking
spaces at the Hind Building, or a comparable site, for off-site employee parking. For
convenience, Ride-On Transportation will provide shuttle service for employees.
4. The applicant shall designate five spaces for short-term parking of 20 minutes to be clearly
marked with green curbing. The applicant shall be responsible for the monitoring and
enforcement of these short-term parking spaces.
5. The use permit shall be reviewed in one year(approximately August 12, 1998), or at any time
that reasonable written complaints are received by the City of San Luis Obispo. At the
review hearing, the Hearing Officer may modify, add or delete conditions, or revoke the
permit. Specifically, the Hearing Officer may direct the P.I.C. to explore the possibility of
requiring off-site workshops. A basis for revocation shall be failure to comply with the
above-stated conditions.
Attachments:
Attachment"A" -Vicinity Map
Attachment"B" - Site Plan for Campanile Building and Tenwise
Attachment"C" - Floor Plan for the One-Stop Career Center
Attachment"D"-Lee Ferrero and Doug Davidson letter dated July 29, 1998
Attachment"E" -Planning Commission minutes from the July 22, 1998 meeting
Attachment"F" -Planning Commission staff report dated July 22, 1998
Attachment"G"-Lee Ferrero letter dated August 4, 1998
Attachment "A"
+ v �
r
' HWY 101
r r
+ , r
f +
r r
♦ r
r r
,
ti
TENWISE
r
, p>
,
CAMPANILE ++
'ca' GRANADA-
r♦ ---�--
ci
•Y J
J `
u c�; ♦
---- -
400 fr-- I. D�0-- ---
VICMTY MAP 3566 South Higuera
A 100-98
7rr `S
\y
•n
•
CD
d k�
0 •
N °' • Secondary
Parking Lot .
for Tenwise I�
_ � 4
• \Parking •
w
• ir�(�R o
Parking
m
CAMPANILE
1 �
PIC • 3546
•
Parking \
•
•
PIC 04
366 N I E
a Panting i
Common Driveway Parking
•\ -- -
SOUTH HIGUERA STREET
Attachment "B" ti
THE CAMPANILE AND TENWISE PARK
A 100-98
Parking.
� A
m ;
I � e•
Q .
a O i t
,n '
-n
O
, � t ( 0 ;
! mF r
ILIC
n
rDm t
AD)
Z v2a
m
n � � N l
r O
s 0 !t r m s
N m � cm—i
1 on m
' m ,
At
m
J t t m
( A o - �
��
oSx
( Fm m oo �.
! i 3o
ONE-STOP CENTER
Attachment "D" F. Cati:dON, PE
ANDREW G. MERRIAM, AIA, AICP
DANIELS. HUTCHINSON. LS
Lannon
ASSOCIATES July 29, 1998
RECEIVED
City of San Luis Obispo JUL 3 0 1998
OF CITY
ENGINEERS Community Development Department OF TAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNERS Attn: Ron Whisenand Y DEVELOPMENT
990 Palm St.
SURVEYORS San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Appeal of Administrative Use Permit(File#A 100-98)
Private Industry Council (3566 South Higuera Street)
Dear Ron:
This letter addresses the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission at their
July 22, 1998 meeting. The Private Industry Council (PIC) offers the following
actions and information for trip reduction,parking management, and conflict
resolution:
• All One-Stop employees (PIC and other agencies) will park off-site.
Negotiations are currently underway to lease approximately 40—50 parking
spaces at the Hind building site, 3765 South Higuera. This will be a new
parking area on the Hind property in addition to the existing 102 spaces.
Administrative Use Permit(AUP) approval is required to formally enact this
proposal.
• Since the Hind building is located across South Higuera more than 300 feet
away from the PIC site, Ride-On Transportation will provide shuttle service
for the employees. Shuttle service will prevent inconvenience and dangerous
street crossings for pedestrians. This will be reviewed as part of the AUP for
off-site parking.
• All PIC customers residing north of Cuesta grade will receive services from
the One-Stop at Cuesta College North County Campus in Paso Robles. The
North County One-Stop will begin providing service in September 1998. It
should be clarified that the San Luis Obispo One-Stop will not likely be in
operation until that time or later. PIC's records show that approximately 40
percent of its clients reside north of Cuesta grade.
364 PACIFIC STREET . On July 23, 1998 Lee Ferrero sent the attached certified-receipt letter sent to
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA Carolyn Larson, appellant and Trustee for the adjacent Tenwise Park.
93401 Chairman Senn suggested the Central Coast Conflict Resolution Program as a
means to a"win-win"situation. As of this date,no response has been
Bos 544-7407 received.
Fax 805 544-3863
PROVIDING SERVICE SINCE 1976
rJ 0
Dannon
ASSOCIATES
Page 2
The Private Industry Council continues to seek solutions and cooperation with
surrounding businesses. The proposed parking management and trip reduction
plan is in direct response to AUP Condition of Approval#2 and the concerns of
the Commission. An annual employee count, schedule of events, and a one-year
review will provide additional safeguards.
The alternative of holding group sessions and workshops at the Hind building was
also evaluated. Off-site orientation workshops, however, are contradictory to the
One-Stop mission of consolidating job-training services.
Please distribute this letter to the Planning Commissioners for their consideration.
Call us if you need any additional information or have any questions.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lee Ferrero,PIC Doug Da son,AICP
President& Chief Executive Officer Cannon Associates
Attachment: Letter to Carolyn Larson, Appellant
97.0623.0Z?CgVI=.doc
/ s/
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment "E"
July 22, 1998
Page 2
Associate Planner Shoals presented the sta report and recommended the Planning
Commission recommend to the City Counci adoption of an ordinance establishing the
Railroad Historic District.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked if hist 'c houses such as the Stationmaster's house and
other properties on Henry, Iris, Jennif r, and George that were previously addressed by
the Commission will be included in th district.
Development Review Manager Whise and said that the proposed Railroad Historic
District does not include the Ella Street eighborhood but that the Cultural Heritage
Committee was expected to review the EI Street neighborhood for possible historic
district status in the future. He said that Long- ange Planning staff would report back to
the Commission on this issue at the next meeting
Chairman Senn asked if neighborhood workshops ave been held.
Development Review Manager Whisenand rept' d yes, at the library.
Chairman Senn expressed concern about t benefits and other issues related to national
historical designations.
There were no further comments/questio s and the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments made.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Marx moved to recommend to the City Council adoption of an ordinance
establishing the Railroad Historic District. he motion was seconded by Commission
Ashbaugh.
AYES: Commissioners Marx, Ashb ugh, Whittlesey, Ready, and Chairman Senn
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioners Ewan and Je ey
The motion carried 5-0.
2. 3566 South Higuera Street: A 100-98: Appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision
approving a request to establish a one-stop career center in conjunction with other
local agencies and the EDD; C-S Zone; Private Industry Council, applicant; Carol
Larson, appellant.
�-sz
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 3
Commissioner Whittlesey refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of
interest.
Associate Planner Shoals presented the staff report and recommended denying the appeal,
thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision to approve the use permit.
Commissioner Marx asked how many staff members would be added.
Associate Planner Shoals stated there will be 39 staff members comprised of 27 PIC
employees and 12 employees from other agencies.
Commissioner Ewan asked parking ratios for school and office zones.
Development Review Manager Whisenand explained that parking ratios for school zones
are based on classroom/facility sizes and floor plans.
Commissioner Ashbaugh questioned staff on parking requirements for different
businesses/offices in the area and asked if comments were received from the Airport Land
Use Commission.
Associate Planner Shoals stated the applicant provided a copy of an action agenda which
showed the Airport Land Use Commission found compatibility of the use.
Commissioner Jeffrey had staff explain the 601/6/40% P.I.C. employee ratio established
by Council and expressed concern about impacts to parking due to intensification of the
use.
Development Review Manager Whisenand noted the Commission has the authority under
Section 17.16.060 to look at alternative parking requirements.
Commissioner Jeffrey is concerned about bicycle/motorcycle parking.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked at what time installation of van parking for disabled will be
undertaken.
Associate Planner Shoals stated if approved, handicapped parking will be addressed
through plan check per state law.
Chairman Senn asked if either property has sought a mixed-use parking reduction.
Development Review Manager Whisenand doesn't believe that request has been made.
�-S3
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 4
There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Carolyn Larson, appellant, distributed and read a letter expressing concerns about the
current parking situation and the health, safety, and welfare of her tenants and their
customers.
Commissioner Marx asked if Tenwise has enough parking for its uses.
Ms. Larson replied yes. There is a problem with the children's gymnastics coming into
the back parking lot because inadequate parking.
Commissioner Ashbaugh asked if Ms. Larson objected to the Central Coast Gymnastics
permit request in granted in`95.
Ms. Larson doesn't recall being noticed of this request. She strongly believes parking is
inadequate.
Doug Davidson, Cannon Associates, P.I.C. representative, cited Council at a recent
meeting as saying the one-stop center is a unique program and the use in conjunction with
state EDD and other local agencies, provided it doesn't exceed 60% P.I.C. employees and
40% other agency employees, is an incidental and ancillary function of P.I.C. in carrying
out its primary mission and is consistent with the tripolar policy of the General Plan. The
use as a job skills training center was approved in 1991 via an administrative use permit.
The expansion of this use to accommodate up to 12 additional employees is deemed
incidental by Council. In working with city staff, it was agreed that 1 parking space/300
s.f. is proper. P.I.C. has submitted a current employee count and has been rescheduling
high attendance activities to avoid peak hours of other businesses. Employees of P.I.C.
park to the rear, leaving front spaces open for customers. A parking management/trip
reduction plan is called for in Condition 2 and the idea is that P.I.C. will consolidate
services. He asked the Commission to give this program a chance to develop and allow
P.I.C. to satisfy the conditions.
Commissioner Ashbaugh had Mr. Davidson explain the rescheduling and attendance of
the workshops.
Lee Ferrero, President and CEO of P.I.C., described the goals of P.I.C. of serving clients
and other agencies that are downsizing by combining operations and resources. Another
goal is to work cooperatively with neighboring tenants/businesses. P.I.C. has
consistently kept in contact with tenants of the Campanile building and Tenwise park
facility. He has submitted to the city a signed memo by all the tenants of Campanile
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 5
indicating there is no parking problem. Out of past parking conflict concerns, he has
contacted the police who have indicated an absence of reports since `95. He noted there
are rare days when the lot is full. Bicycle/motorcycle spaces are located at the rear of the
lot and adequate handicapped spaces are provided. A companion one-stop center will be
built in Paso Robles at the Cuesta campus which will open this Fall and serves north
county clients. PIC is considering other locations to hold some workshops.
Commissioner Marx asked if neighboring land/businesses might have additional parking
spaces which could be leased for P.I.C. use.
Mr. Ferrero doesn't know of any. He has approached the Eagle Lodge and 84 Lumber,
but neither was interested.
Commissioner Jeffrey noted he visited the site when the lot was full and the motorcycle
parking area was occupied by a car. He spoke with P.I.C. employees who indicated the
eight-station compute lab is open from 9:00 a.m. and is used for up to eight hours at a
time by clients.
Michele Robles, P.I.C. Deputy Dir., stated clients can use the compute lab for eight
hours, but the typical use is under two hours.
Commissioner Jeffrey understands the career resource center is open at 8:00 am. and will
accommodate up to three persons for two hours at a time and there are two
workshops/mo. from 8:00 am. to 4:00 p.m.
Ms. Robles stated the workshops are from 9:30 am. to 4:00 p.m. and an average of 20
people attend. She explained where the computer and other labs will be held within the
building.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if the entire center is currently occupied/used.
Ms. Robles replied no and described the envisioned future expansion of the resource
center.
Commissioner Jeffrey noted he spoke with other site tenants/employees who indicated
there is a parking problem on a regular basis.
Commissioner Marx asked if clients stay for short periods of time.
Ms. Robles replied yes and described typical visits as being under two hours.
Commissioner Marx asked if there is time-limited parking the lot.
��SS
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 6
Ms. Robles replied no.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked if all clients attend an orientation.
Mr. Robles replied yes, from 9:15 a.m. to noon.
Chairman Senn asked the current number of employees at this site and of those, how
many are full time.
Ms. Robles replied there are 25 employees on site with 50%there 8 hrs./day.
Chairman Senn asked the average number of clients on site during the day.
Ms. Robles replied around 10.
Chairman Senn asked if many clients arrive via pubic transportation.
Ms. Robles replied less than I%.
Chairman Senn asked if P.I.C. has had trouble with other businesses using their lot.
Ms. Robles replied yes, this does happen.
Ms. Larson stated that she received information that P.I.C.'s career days have already
been rescheduled. Parking and potentially dangerous fire problems impact the health,
safety, and welfare of other tenants and citizens.
Seeing no further speakers come forward,the public comment session was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Marx moved to deny the appeal and uphold the Hearing Officer's decision
to approve the use permit. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ready.
Commissioner Marx isn't clear on how many cars would be added to the site by the
contemplated change in use.
Commissioner Ready asked what is planned to be accomplished by the proposed staff
recommended additional condition.
S6
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 7
Associate Planner Shoals stated it's proposed to help staff follow activity that occurs over
the next year in preparation for annual city review.
Commissioner Ready asked if it would be helpful if P.I.C. provided client attendance
figures.
Associate Planner Shoals replied yes.
Commissioner Ready asked if municipal ordinances govern parking in other businesses'
lots.
Attorney Trujillo replied yes.
Commissioner Ready believes tenants from both buildings use the lots. A property
owner can address parking complaints/situations through the municipal code and cars can
be towed away.
Development Review Manager Whisenand believes there's leeway though the use permit
process to hopefully resolve situations.
Commissioner Marx suggested requiring additional workshops to be held off site.
Commissioner Jeffrey supports the one-stop career center concept, but doesn't believe
justice will be done to this area by approving this use permit as designed because the
parking is too intense for the building and surrounding buildings. He questions whether
parking space requirements are meeting the actual use of the site. One space/300 s.f. isn't
adequate for the uses occurring. He would be comfortable with a parking requirement
recalculation based upon using the 40 s.f. of seating area per parking space of meeting
areas/rooms. Perhaps Commissioner Marx's suggestion of time-limited parking would
alleviate some impacts.
Commissioners Ashbaugh and Ewan concurred. They cannot support the application at
the present time and feel the use may be over intensified.
Commissioner Marx would like to limit the number of cars/spaces assignable to P.I.C. on
site. She feels with the cooperation of P.I.C. a solution can be reached.
Development Review Manager Whisenand noted such a condition would be impossible
to verify and enforce.
x-57
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 8
Chairman Senn believes by approving the use permit with conditions and with the risk of
having the use permit revoked, P.I.C., will be forced to find a solution to deal with
parking and get some workshops off site. He's comfortable approving the use permit.
AYES: Commissioners Marx, Ready, and Chairman Senn
NOES: Commissioners Ewan,Jeffrey, and Ashbaugh
REFRAIN: Commissioner Whittlesey
The vote was 3-3 reflecting no action.
Commissioner Marx suggested a six-month review rather than waiting one year.
Commissioner Jeffrey believes solutions are needed before approval is granted. He
believes it would be helpful if the applicant secured additional parking for off-site
employee parking.
Commissioner Ewan believes 53 parking spaces are inadequate for the expanded use.
Commissioner Jeffrey suggested recalculating the parking requirements based upon
actual use with the stipulation that some spaces could be off site with P.I.C. providing
transportation for employees and clients.
Development Review Manager Whisenand expressed a concern about requiring off-site
parking.
Commissioner Marx suggested a continuance to allow staff to work with the applicant to
supply a combination of concepts/restrictions on parking such as time-limited parking
and/or paid employee bus passes.
Commissioners Ashbaugh and Jeffrey support a parking requirement
recalculation/adjustment.
Commissioner Marx moved to continue this item to Aug. 12, 1998, to recalculate parking
requirements given the intensity of the meeting use for specific floor space and with
direction to city staff and the applicant to develop a workable parking management plan.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ashbaugh.
AYES: Commissioners Marx, Ashbaugh, Ewan, Ready, Jeffrey, and
Chairman Senn
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioner Whittlesey
�-s�
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
July 22, 1998
Page 9
The motion carried 6-0.
3. 3860 Broad Street: U 113-9,(1 st to allow a 12,000 s.f. fitness club at
Marigold Center; C-S-PD, Menter, LLC., applicant.
Chairman Senn refrained from p icipation due to a potential conflict of interest.
Commissioner Ready was designated ting chairman.
Associate Planner Shoals presented the st report and recommended approving the use
permit with findings and subject to condition outlined in the staff report.
Commissioner Ewan had staff explain the origi of the daycare center.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked if there will be change in the parking configuration.
Associate Planner Shoals replied no.
Commissioner Ashbaugh expressed a cone about the adjacent lots on Poinsettia.
Development Review Manager Whisen d stated a mitigation measure applied to the
Marigold project for a sound wall/screeni g along the property line.
There were no further comments/questions d the public comment session was opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Tom Phillips, Marigold project Manager, requ ed approval of the use permit and
explained that parking will not be impacted and a hasized use compatibility. He has
requested and has been granted approval by Marigol 's anchor tenant Vons. There have
been no complaints with the existing Cory Club. a is concerned with the use of the
word "revoke" in the conditions and requested this b stricken.
Randy Bush, 2668 Shetland PI., Arroyo Grande Cory Club owner, came forward to
answer questions. He explained the current club use and the demand for a second club.
He feels parking will not be an issue at this site.
Commissioner Whittlesey asked how many emp yees will be at the new club and how
many members are expected.
Mr. Bush estimated 15 employees and 1,500 membe .
Attachment "F"
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM # 2
BY: John Shoals, Associate Planner MEETING DATE: July 22, 1998
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manageq
FILE NUMBER: A 100-98
PROJECT ADDRESS: 3566 S Hieuera
SUBJECT: Appeal of Hearing Officer's approval of an administrative use permit to allow the
establishment of a one-stop career center in C-S zone.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal,thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision to approve the use permit.
BACKGROUND
Situation.
On June 19, 1998, the City Hearing Officer approved an administrative use permit allowing the
Private Industry Council (P.I.C.) to establish a "one-stop" career center in conjunction with the
State of California Employment Development Department (E.D.D.) and other local agencies.
Carolyn Larson, Trustee for Tenwise Park, DBA: CL II Intervest (adjacent property), has
appealed the Hearing Officer's decision stating that there is not enough onsite parking to
accommodate the P.I.C, and that approval of the use permit will exacerbate an ongoing parking
problem between the tenants of the Campanile Building (Campanile) and Tenwise Park
(Tenwise). She is asking the Planning Commission to reverse the Hearing Officer's decision and
to deny the subject use permit.
Data Summary
Address: 3440 through 3730 S. Higuera(even)
Applicant: Private Industry Council
Representatives: Cannon Associates
Zoning: Service Commercial (C-S)
General Plan: Services and Manufacturing
Environmental status: Negative declaration of environmental impact granted by the
director December 17, 1997. Final action on the environmental
document will be taken by the City Council.
Project action deadline: August 5, 1998
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 2
Site description
The project site is approximately 2.80 acres in size and zoned C-S. The property is developed
with an approximate 33,000 square foot commercial building (known as the Campanile),parking
and landscaping. The Campanile is occupied by four tenants—the P.I.C. (12,600 sq.ft.), Clutch
Masters/Monterey Imports (5,000 sq.ft.), the Furniture Installation Team (1,200 sq.ft.) and
Central Coast Gymnastics(12,000 sq.ft.).
Project description
The project is a request for an administrative use permit to allow the Private Industry Council to
establish "one-stop" career center with the State E.D.D. and other local agencies. The primary
purpose of the center is to consolidate job training, career education and job placement services
for San Luis Obispo County residents. The P.I.C. facilities at 3566 South Higuera will serve as
offices for these various social services. As part of its service,the P.I.C. presently holds weekly
orientation/workshops, with a maximum of 25 attendees. A more detailed description of the
P.I.C. operations is contained in the applicant's letters of July 14, 1998 and May 21, 1998.
At the request and direction of the City Hearing Officer, the applicant has submitted additional
information on the number of employees for the Planning Commission's review and
consideration. There will be a total of 39 staff members at the one-stop career center. Of this
total, 27 (69%) will be P.I.C. employees with 12 (31%) employees from other agencies. State
E.D.D. will have nine(9)employees, Department of Social Services will have two (2) employees
and the Area Agency on Aging/American Association,of Retired Persons (AARP) will have one
(1)employee at the center.
Project History
In June of 1991, the City's Hearing Officer approved a use permit allowing the Private Industry
Council to establish a 4,900 sq.ft.job skills training center at 3566 South Higuera. Over the past
seven years, P.I.C. has expanded its offices under the previously approved use permit, U 41-91,
and now occupies 12,600 sq.ft. of the building.
In October of 1997, P.I.C. filed applications, with the City, for a General Plan Land Use text
amendment and environmental review to expand the social services area node of the City's "tri-
polar policy"relating to where governmental agency offices should locate within the city.
On February 11, 1998, the Planning Commission denied the proposed General Plan amendment
expressing concerns with the project's overall effect on surrounding properties;the lack of demand
for expansion of the social services area; and the need for a General Plan amendment to
accommodate PIC's plans to relocate 13 government employees to its existing facilities.
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 3
On February 18, 1998, the Private Industry Council appealed the Commission's decision to the
City Council.
On March 17, 1998, the City Council denied the general plan amendment, but adopted a finding
that the "one-stop" center is a unique program, and that the use of a "one-stop" career center in
conjunction with the State E.D.D. and other local agencies(provided it does not exceed a ratio of
60% P.I.C. employees and 40% other agency employees) is a minor, incidental and ancillary
function of P.I.C. in carrying out its primary mission,and is consistent with the tri-polar policy of
the social services node. As such, a General Plan amendment is not required for the P.I.C. to
establish a one-stop career center. However,the use does require approval of an administrative use
permit to address site-specific issues such as parking and land use compatibility.
On May 22, 1998,the P.I.C. filed an application for a use permit to establish the one-stop career
center. Use permit A 100-98 was approved,with findings and conditions, on June 19, 1998. A
copy of the findings and conditions approved by the Hearing Officer and a copy of the minutes
from the administrativehearing are attached for Planning Commission review and consideration.
On June 29, 1998,the Hearing Officer's decision was appealed to the City Planning Commission.
EVALUATION
The appellant is objecting to the project because she believes that there is a lack of onsite parking
to accommodate the existing uses and the new one-stop career center. She states that there is an
ongoing parking problem because the tenants of the Campanile building park in the spaces
reserved for the tenants of Tenwise. The appellant feels that approval of the use permit allowing
a one-stop career center use will exacerbate an existing problem. Moreover, she does not feel
that the conditions of approval, approved by the Hearing Officer, adequately address the parking
issue. A copy of the appellant's letter is attached to this report. One July 1, 1998, the applicant
submitted a letter in response to various claims made by Ms. Larson.. A copy of that letter is
also attached for your review and information.
Parking
There was substantial discussion on parking at the July 19 meeting. Issues discussed included:
existing parking conditions at the site and the Tenwise Center; the parking requirements for the
existing P.I.C. offices, the proposed one-stop career center use as well as the entire Campanile
building; the best way to calculate the P.I.C.'s parking demands to most accurately reflect their
operations (i.e., offices versus classrooms); and alternatives to reduce existing and future parking
problems between tenants at the Campanile building and the Tenwise Center.
i-�z
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 4
Existing Conditions
Based on the applicant's information and a site visit, it was determined that there are 86 parking
spaces available at the Campanile building. These spaces are distributed among four tenants as
follows: the P.I.C. (53 spaces), Monterey Imports/Clutch Masters (10 spaces), Furniture
Installation Team (3 spaces) and Central Coast Gymnastics (20 spaces). Individual tenant
parking spaces are clearly identified and marked on the wheel stops. Although,the City does not
require or condone this type of parking reservation, it would appears to be appropriate due to past
parking problems.
On June 17, 1998, City staff visited to the Tenwise to determine how many spaces are provided
for its tenants. Tenwise consists of two separate commercial buildings with six tenants.
Building 1 (3536 S. Higuera), which fronts onto South Higuera, is occupied by Valley Lighting,
Castle Stained Glass, Graffans (tool cutting, etc.), Owens Music and Futons For Less. Building
2 (3546 S. Higuera) is occupied by San Luis Obispo Athletic Club. Currently, there are
approximately 84 striped parking spaces available at Tenwise. There are 67 marked spaces along
the common driveway and adjacent to both buildings. In addition, there is a secondary lot,
immediately west of Building 2, with 17 marked spaces and room for another 17 to 20 spaces.
This partially improved lot and an unimproved grass area are being used as additional parking for
SLO Athletic Club. Tenwise management has clearly labeled their spaces as being unavailable
to the P.I.C. and Central Coast Gymnastics as well the other tenants of the Campanile building.
Although there exists a common driveway agreement between the two properties, the parking
stalls do not have similar reciprocal rights.
Parking Requirements for the Progosed Use and Campanile Building
Although City Zoning Regulations do not include a specific use category for P.I.C., it was
determined that the proposed use is a combination of social services, professional offices,
employment agencies, all of which have a parking requirement of 1 space per 300 square feet of
gross floor area, and that this parking ratio would be appropriate for the proposed one-stop career
center. Using this parking standard, it was determined that P.I.C. has a parking demand of 42
spaces and is providing 53 spaces which meets the City parking requirement.
Based on City standards, the Campanile building has a parking requirement of 76 spaces. and
provides 86 spaces, 10 more than required. Establishment of a one-stop career center will not
change the parking requirement as these expanded services would occur within the existing
P.I.C. offices (12,600 sq.ft.) which would only be reconfigured to accommodate the additional
employees. The City parking requirement for this type of office use is based on gross floor area
and not number of employees.
�-� 3
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 5
At the administrative hearing, the appellant raised the question why the proposed use was not
defined as a school and required to meet the parking requirements for schools. Staff had the
applicant submit a floor plan identifying spaces to be used for workshops and/or classroom.
According to project plans, a majority of the space is use for offices with about 1,500 sq.ft.
designated for a workshop and library. While a small portion of the building is used for
workshops, it was determined that these workshops are not used like traditional classrooms in
which 30 students congregate on a daily basis for up to six hours. Based on these reasons, it
determined that the use cannot be classified as a traditional or specialized school. The
applicant's letter,dated July 1, 1998,also speaks to this issue.
Additional Parking Concerns
It should, however, be noted that City parking requirements do not provide for the anticipated
group functions at P.I.C. It is staffs understanding that P.I.C. presently holds weekly
orientations/workshops,with a maximum of 25 people,onsite. These workshops and other large
group functions may generate additional onsite parking needs that cannot be accommodated. For
example, if there are 25 attendees at a workshop and 10 additional parking spaces, these
individuals would most likely park in Tenwise's parking lot, creating problems between tenants.
At the June 19 meeting, the Hearing Officer imposed two conditions to address parking concerns.
First,there will be an annual review of the use permit to determine if there are parking problems.
Based on his findings, the Hearing Officer could modify the conditions of the use permit to
require more parking, or that workshops be conducted offsite, or revoke the permit. Second, the
applicant was required to submit a Trip Reduction and Parking Management Plan for staff
review and approval. The Hearing Officer's Findings and Conditions are attached for Planning
Commission review and consideration.
On July 14, 1998, the applicant submitted additional information regarding the findings and
conditions for use permit, A 100-98. A copy of that letter is also attached.
Other issues
The appellant raised the issue of no van-accessible handicap parking space at the P.I.C. offices.
As shown on the site plan, four handicap parking spaces are provided at the Campanile building,
but none are van-accessible spaces. According to the Building Division, the Campanile building
is required to provide 1 van-accessible space. This space will be required when the P.I.C.
submits a building permit application for tenant improvements.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The appellant has indicated that she is considering installing a chain to prevent Campanile
building tenants from parking on her property. Staff consulted the Public Works Department -
A 100-98
3566 South Higuera
Page 6
Engineering Division to find out if this could legally be done. According to Engineering, there is
a common driveway agreement and shared utility easements that would prevent Ms. Larson from
installing a chain barrier along this common driveway.
No other departments had no concerns with this request.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission may also consider the following three alternative actions.
1. The Planning Commission may approve the appeal, thereby denying the use permit for the
one-stop career center use. If the Commission denies the project; it must establish the
appropriate findings for denial.
2. The Planning Commission may approve the appeal and modify the Hearing Officer's
findings and conditions to include additional requirements for the use.
3. The Planning Commission may continue action. Direction should be given to staff and the
applicant.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal thereby upholding the Hearing Officer's decision and approving administrative
use permit (A 100-98) with findings and conditions. Staff is also recommending that the
Planning Commission add the following conditions to the administrative use permit
Additional Conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the City with a shedule of all workshops and other group events
that will be held at P.I.C. offices over the next year.
Attached:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Reduced Parking Plan
3. Hearing Officer approved Findings and Conditions for A 100-98
4. Minutes from the June 19, 1998 administrative hearing
5. Letter of Appeal from Carolyn Larson,Trustee Tenwise Park
6. Letter from Lee Ferrero, President and CEO - Private Industry Council, dated July 1, 1998
7. Letter from Lee Ferrero, President and CEO-Private Industry Council, dated July 14, 1998
8. Letter from Lee Ferrero, President and CEO-Private Industry Council, dated May 21, 1998
ATTACHMENT. I
, f ,
HWY 101
f � r
� r
,
� r
- , r
r p�
,
®
G RANADA '
U'r --
Q
' 4v
----- - IND=r- -
\ f Z
L,_L
VICMTY MAP 3566 South Higuera
A 100-98
ATTACHMENT 2
s
s
100
100
cem&oow
a � .
>oo
Nc.
Kc
.20,
209
J
FU*CrLFE 207
N9TALl2M TEA61 207
207
v 205
n 205
100 I
o 6FiiB
MO Y�a'Otoo
— f00
0
n
o CLUrCHMAHi6IB I
n 205-M
0
n
PRVA7E NDUUM
a COINCL
200-204
o_
MWIM MUffW too
COtNM
W-IN
- - - - --j
MVATE N7WW
I CCUNM
LO-U4 I
tao
PARKING COUNT
t0 = = CENTRAL COAST GYMNASTICS 20 SPACES
SCALSr-W FURNITURE INSTALLATION TEAM 3 SPACES
MONTEREY IMPORTS 5 SPACES
t CLUTCH MASTERS 5 SPACES
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL 53 SPACES
HANDICAP SPACES 4 SPACES
S. HKWE iA STFEEr
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL
PARKING LAYOUT- 7-14-98 � / J7
97062TPNKWGDVG (D
ATTACHMENT 3
exiJ11►►11II�IIIIII�o III
A city of sAn luis 013,1S
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
July 7, 1998
Andrew Merriam,AICP UPDATED
Cannon Associates
364 Pacific Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl.A 100-98
3566 South Higuera Street, Suites 100 thru 106 and 203 & 104
Dear Mr. Merriam:
On Friday, June 19, 1998, 1 conducted a public hearing on your request to establish a
one-stop career center in conjunction with other local agencies and EDD, at the above
location.
After reviewing the information presented, I approved your request, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Fins
1. On March 17, 1998, the City of San Luis Obispo City Council adopted Resolution
No. 8781 with the finding that the one-stop career center is a unique program,
and that the use of a one-stop career center in conjunction with the State of
Califomia Employment Development Department (E.D.D.) and other local
agencies (provided it does not exceed a ratio of 60%-P.I.C. employees and 40%
other agency employees) is a minor, incidental and ancillary function of P.I.C. in
carrying out its primary mission, and is consistent with the tri-polar policy of the
social services node.
2. The one-stop career center use has a parking requirement of 42 parking spaces
(1 space per 300 square feet of floor area per City Zoning Regulations), and
PIC presently provides 53 parking spaces which meets City parking standards.
3. The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or
working at the site or in the vicinity.
/O The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
V� Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. /�/ O
. A 100-98
Page 2
4. The use is appropriate at the proposed location as it is compatible. with and
complimentary to the existing uses in the Campanile Building. In' addition, the
County Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the use is compatible
with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan.
5. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, with mitigation, as adopted for
the General Plan Amendment GP 145-97 on December 17, 1997. The proposed
use or similar type of use was anticipated at the time of environmental review
and no further review is required.
Conditions
1. The "one-stop" career center shall not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C. employees
and 40% other agency employees. The applicant shall submit an annual report
of employee operations, including the number of employees by agency and the
anticipated employee hours of work at the site to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director.
2. To ensure that there are no significant parking demands associated with group
events such as orientation workshops, the applicant shall submit a Trip
Reduction and Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the
Community Development Director. The plan shall include: a schedule of group
functions and events; demarcation of those areas reserved for...employee
parking and client/customer parking; and how overflow parking will be handled.
The plan should also include automobile trip and parking reduction strategies
such as carpooling, van-pooling, bicycling and public transportation. The
applicant could offer employees and clients incentives such as free bus passes
and/or other compensation for utilizing these.strategies.
3. The use permit shall be reviewed in one year(approximately June 20, 1999), or
at any time that reasonable written complaints are received by the City of San
Luis Obispo. At the review hearing, the Hearing Officer may modify, add, or
delete conditions, or revoke the use permit. Specifically, the Hearing Officer may
require additional parking for the use or explore the possibility of requiring off-site
workshops. A basis for revocation shall be failure to comply with the above-
stated conditions.
Due to City water allocation regulations, my approval expires after three years if
construction has not started, unless conditions of approval designate a different time
period. See Municipal Code Section 17.58.070.D.for possible renewal.
If your project involves building one or more -new dwellings or additional non-residential
space, it may be subject to the requirement for a water allocation or a water usage offset
Contact this department for details.
A 100-98
Page 3
My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within 10 days of the
action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision.
If you have any questions,please call John Shoals at 781-7166.
Sincerely,
Ron Id Whisen nd
Hearing Officer
cc: Private Industry Council
3566 S. Higuera Street, Suite 100
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Fiduciary Properties, Inc.
c/o Tony Petruzzi
857 Santa Rosa Street
SLO, CA 93401
Marti Reed
P.O. Box 1756
SLO, CA 93406-1756
ATTACHMENT 4
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING - MINUTES
FRIDAY JUNE 19, 1998
3566 South Hiauera Street- Suites 100 thru 106 and 203 & 204. Use Permit Appl. A
100-98; Request to establish a one-stop career center in conjunction with
other local agencies and EDD; C-S zone; Private Industry Council,
applicant.
Associate Planner John Shoals presented the staff report, noting this item came before
the Planning Commission and City Council as a request to expand the social services
node of the City's tri-polar policy area. He summarized the City Council action and
finding regarding the PIC. establishing a one-stop center and the 60/40 ratio of PIC
employees to other employees. He explained that the project is a second phase to that
initial finding made by the City Council. He noted that another issue that came up
during previous hearings was parking as there seems to have been some parking
conflicts between tenants at the Campanile building and the Tenwise Center. This is
due to the types of uses and overflow parking at peak hours of operation. Associate
Planner Shoals followed up with noting that the career center use will not exacerbate
the parking problem because it does meet the City's parking requirement. This
conclusion was based on information that was submitted to staff by the applicant and
his representative. Letters were received from tenants in the Tenwise building and a
letter from Mr. Frazier representing the Walter Center. He noted that all this information
was taken into consideration in developing a recommendation on this project and trying
to develop adequate findings and conditions toaddress the main issues. Associate
Planner Shoals read the findings and conditions.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand clarified that the entire center has a requirement for 76
on-site parking spaces, but has 86 available, which is 10 more spaces than required by
the City's code.
Associate Planner Shoals elaborated upon condition number two which addressed
parking for PIC employees and clients, suggestions for trip reduction and how overflow
parking would be handled.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand had several questions regarding this permit application,
such as the total number of employees planned for the office. Associate Planner
Shoals informed him that it could be up to 26 PIC employees and approximately 13
EDD employees plus clients. The applicant could better answer the question. PIC
currently has 53 assigned spaces. It is estimated that the additional spaces will also be
assigned. There was some discussion of the requirement of condition number one
regarding the number of allowed employees and reporting procedures, particularly as
relates to parking. Hearing Officer Whisenand noted that he had received written
/- I/
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 2
comments expressing concern from Carolyn Larson and Don Owens, regarding parking
problems. Hearing Officer Whisenand summarized Don Owens' letter.
The public hearing was opened.
Doug Davidson, applicant's representative and Lee Ferrero, the director of the Private
Industry Council (PIC), and the property management team. A brief background
explanation. Mr. Davidson noted that this hearing was a follow-up to the March 17,
1998 review by the City Council and then proceeded to read the Findings section of the
staff report. Mr. Davidson began with an explanation of parking spaces. Mr. Davidson
noted that PIC is.defined as a job skills training center. Mr. Davidson noted that there
is no specific requirement in the landuse ordinance for a job skills training center.
There are parking requirements for social service agencies, employment agencies and
government agencies, all of which are 1 parking space for 300 square feet of floor area.
Mr. Davidson noted that PIC is a combination of these three types of agencies. Based
on a pre-application conference with Associate Planner John Shoals, it seemed
appropriate for PIC to follow these same parking regulations. The PIC space is 12,600
square feet divided by 300 equals 42 parking spaces, versus the 53 that PIC is
provided.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand clarified the existing PIC square footage plus the
expansion equals 12,600 square feet.
Mr. Davidson noted that the parking ratio for PIC would then be 1 space for 238 square
feet or 11 parking spaces more or about 25% above that standard. Mr. Davidson did
note that some questions still remained concerning parking. Mr. Davidson mentioned
that the parking. standard does not have a breakdown on parking for employees or
customers, it just states 1 per 300. Mr. Davidson pointed out that PIC has gone
beyond that. They are conducting parking management programs on-site as required
by condition #2. Higher attendance activities will be scheduled to avoid the peak hours
at the neighboring tenants. PIC employees on-site all day will park in the rear of the
building. PIC parking spaces are all assigned.
Mr. Davidson summarized the following points in PIC's favor: 1) City Council action
deeming one-stop center minor and incidental function of PIC's function. 2) Condition
of City Council and Administrative Use permit for a 60/40 ratio. 3) PIC provides 53
parking spaces on-site, above that of the City standard; and 4) Going beyond the 1-
300 parking number and working with neighboring tenants and managing actively the
parking on the side. The recommended conditions cover things the PIC is already
working on. The PIC will put together an information package that satisfies and
complies and summarizes the information to meet those conditions. Mr. Davidson did
have a question on condition #3 about annual review, he was under the impression it
was a one-time in one-year review, absent any problems PIC would be not be subject
�-7z
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 3 _
to annual reviews with no end in sight. Mr. Davidson feels that six months'to a year
would be appropriate for a review.
Lee Ferrero, President & CEO of PIC briefly explained background of one-stop centers
and emerging trends of combining services with EDD and other social service agencies.
(The tape ended cutting off any further comments.)
Donald Walter questioned the 60/40 employee split required by Condition #3 and how
this would be determined.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand discussed this ratio and how many PIC employees
there would be and how many other agency employees.
Carolyn Larson, Trustee of Tenwise Park, asked why PIC was not required to have
square footage for schooling.
Associate Planner John Shoals addressed this by explaining that a minimal amount of
space would be used for training, and so it did not meet the definition of traditional
classrooms. The parking ratio is based on office square footage.
Mrs. Larson stated that Mr. Ferrero had told her that he has 26 employees and was
looking at 17 additional employees coming in from other agencies, plus 45 persons
attending the workshop. She spoke with FIT, and office supply company, which has
1250 square feet is allotted three parking spaces. The Central Coast Gymnastics
owner, who has 12,000 square feet is allotted 24 parking spaces. Monterey Imports
has 5,000 square feet is allotted 10 parking spaces. PIC has 53 parking spaces. This
totals 91 parking spaces for the building, not including Napa and Clutch Masters. There
are only 86 parking spaces on the premises, so this leaves a shortage of five parking
spaces, plus the handicap spaces required are going to take more space leaving 7
parking spaces short. Mrs. Larson feels that an annual review is a necessity because
of PIC's employee uncertainty. She feels six to nine months is appropriate, but that it
should be a yearly review. Mrs. Larson discussed the problems surrounding
businesses (particularly gym patrons) have had with parking. Some disputes required
the police to be called. Mrs. Larson has stated that, if necessary, she will chain her
parking lot on the PIC side. She did note that Tenwise Building has adequate parking,
but only if PIC clients stay out of the Tenwise parking lot.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand thanked Mrs. Larson for her comments and expressed
appreciation of her past cooperation with parking problems related to PIC. He asked
her specifically who is using all the parking at her lot.
Mrs. Larson stated that in the past the gym and the PIC were the problem. She has
labeled the lot and now only has a problem with PIC people.
1- 73
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 4
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked her if this is because PIC people park'wherever
is convenient or if there are so many people at PIC that there is insufficient parking.
Mrs. Larson feels that many of the people using PIC are just parking wherever is most
convenient, even though there may be spaces in the PIC parking lot. She feels that
because of the building layouts and the parking lot layouts, it is just easier to park in her
parking lot.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand, indicating a drawing layout of the project, set up a
what-if scenario if PIC was denied. He asked if another office project was built on this
site, would there still be a parking problem.
Mrs. Larson stated that she feels there would be a problem, although a retailer would
have people parking for shorter terms. PIC people tend to park for much longer, and
she envisions it would be-even longer when workshops are offered. She does not want
to assume any added responsibilities, so she does not want any PIC clients parking in
her lot She feels that Mr. Ferrero implied. that in planning workshops at non-peak
hours he would be doing so in order to continue using her parking lot.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand noted that it did not sound to him like Mr. Ferrero
meant that off-peak usage would mean using her lot. They would be using the
Campanile parking lot when perhaps the gym is not as full. He is not necessarily
condoning parking in her parking lot.
Mrs. Larson stated that most of the PIC parking, outside of the workshops, is in the
front. The biggest amount of parking in the front is in her parking lot. She noted that
she is not the PIC, nor the Campanile building, and that she is responsible to her
tenants. They pay rent and parking spaces are part of that rent. She mentioned that
the PIC has labeled parking spaces in their lot well past other businesses, so she
wonders where those other businesses park.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand confirmed that everyone's spaces are marked. The
City does not normally condone this type of reservation, however he feels in this case it
is probably not a bad idea because of the parking problems.
Mrs. Larson again reviewed how many spaces each business is supposed to have, but
noted that none of them are marked except for PIC.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand questioned Doug Davidson as to why only PIC spaces
are marked and all other spaces are unmarked.
Christina Dodson answered on behalf of Doug Davidson that all of the spaces are
marked and they are marked according to the plan. She noted that all of the tenants in
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 5 _
the Campanile are happy with the markings, so she was confused as to why Mrs.
Larson was concerned about Campanile parking spaces.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand thanked Ms. Dodson, informing her that further
clarification might be addressed after Mrs. Larson finished speaking.
Mrs. Larson requested that Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand go out to 3566 South
Higuera and confirm that all businesses have the requisite number of parking spaces.
Mrs. Larson stated that FIT was authorized 3 parking spaces and the gym 24 parking
spaces.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand noted that the gym had a use permit that specified 20
parking spaces.
Mrs. Larson still requested that it be checked that each business has their allotted
parking spaces, marked.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked Mrs. Larson what she thinks it will take to fix the
problem. He acknowledged that she believes the expansion in the existing area will
worsen the problem, but given that there is a shared driveway and that people may not
realize it is two separate pieces of property, what would the solution be.
Mrs. Larson does not feel it can be fixed. She thinks that because most people do not
come to PIC regularly, there is not way to police them.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked for any other speakers.
Christina Dodson offered some clarification on the number of spaces allotted each
business at the Campanile business. Clutch Masters has 5 spaces, Monterey Imports
has 5 spaces - they are owned by the same individual so they are marked the way that
person wished.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand stated he felt property management issues, operational
issues and parking rage issues were well addressed.
Carolyn Larson noted that the 10 spaces of Monterey Imports/Clutch Masters is not
included in the 91 spaces. She restated that there were 3 spaces for FIT, 24 for the CC
Gym, 10 for the Monterey, 53 for PIC comes out to 91.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand disagreed on the math, nothing that he had a total of
86. It was pointed out that the gym actually has 20 spaces. Hearing Officer Whisenand
noted 20 spaces for the gym, 3 for FIT, 5 for Monterey Imports, 5 for Clutch Masters,
and 53 for PIC comes out to 86. He noted the code requires 76.
/r ZS'
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 6
Mrs. Larson asked if the handicap/van accessible spaces were included.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand noted that they are counted as spaces.
Mrs. Larson noted that they do not currently have van accessible handicap spaces.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked Doug Davidson and Lee Ferrero if there were
any further questions or clarifications.
Doug Davidson addressed the traffic generation on Higuera. The consolidation of the
services would reduce the traffic trips in the area. An EDD employee would either go to
the Social Services building, possibly relocated to PIC resulting in the same number of
trips for that individual. For customers, instead of going to the Social Services building
and to PIC, the one-stop idea would be just one place. He also addressed comments
that this was not a good location for government. PIC is not govemment, and they
don't want to be. They want to provide some accessory governmental services.
They've looked at other locations in governmental zones, they like to be in a business
area. They are in the business of improving people's livelihood through their
employment. He noted that they were not by definition a school, but a training'center.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked about the issue of length of stay. What is the
average length of stay of one of the clients coming to PIC?
Lee Ferrero guessed a first-time client would be there about 20 minutes.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked about a regular client, perhaps involved in skill
training, would the average stay be longer than 20 minutes.
Lee Ferrero stated that it would be approximately 45 minutes.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand asked Mr. Ferrero if there were any final statements.
Lee Ferrero stated that EDD is going to non-public access, becoming primarily
accessible by touch tone telephone. The other point was handicap access, EDD has
checked out the parking lot and the building and have asked for some railing changes
in the bathrooms. They did find all other features in compliance.
The public hearing was closed.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand stated he felt the primary issue was parking, the
Council had made that clear. He is following Council direction in notifying surrounding
businesses and making sure this project is compatible. He stated a lot of the parking
�'76
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 7 _
problems come from the way the two centers were designed. The PIC project complies
with the letter of the law, in fact providing .10 additional spaces. He did note that there
are parking problems in the neighborhood, involving parking rage. Although the project
does meet the parking code, he must base his decision on whether or not this parking
requirement works for this particular project. The additional square footage is 2,500
square feet. In looking at the expansion area, how the applicants are intending to use
the space, the parking criteria that the code provides and at the situation on the
adjoining properties he feels that the findings can be made. He noted that the 60/40
condition serves a dual purpose of limiting the number of additional employees that can
come on this site. The condition requiring the applicant to submit the number of
employees is very important to determine compliance with the 60/40 split, but also to
determine compliance with parking criteria. He approves the use permit subject to the
five findings recommended by staff with emphasis on compliance with the City's parking
requirements. He addressed each of the conditions. Regarding condition #1, he would
like to change it to have an annual submittal of employee operations. He thought
condition #2 may resolve some of the parking rage and may free up parking spaces.
He recommends that other alternative forms of transportation be seriously investigated.
He felt condition #3 is clear, and that the use permit will be reviewed in one year, June
20, 1999. -Another administrative use permit hearing will conducted during June 1999.
At that time all issues will be reviewed again, that will be the time to review any further
parking problems. Modification on language in condition #3, specifically "the Hearing
Officer may modify, add, or delete conditions, or revoke the use permit." He
suggested saying "or explore possibility requiring off-site orientation workshops."
Lee Ferrero questioned specifying "orientation workshops." He suggested saying
just "workshops" in case the name or type of workshops should change.
Hearing Officer Ron Whisenand agreed, the sentence will change "the Hearing Officer
may require additional parking for the use or explore the possibility of requiring off-site
workshops." He asked about language changes for condition #1, regarding the annual.
"The "one-stop" career center shall not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C. employees and
40% other agency employees. The applicant shall submit an annual report of
employee operations 'including the number of employees by agency and anticipated
employee hours of work at the site to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.'"
Findings
1 . On March 17, 1998, the City of San Luis Obispo City Council adopted
Resolution No. 8781 with the finding that the one-stop career center is a
unique program, and that the use of a one-stop career center in conjunction
with the State of California Employment Development Department (E.D.D.)
/- 77
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 8
and other local agencies (provided it does not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C.
employees and 40% other agency employees) is a minor, incidental and
ancillary function of P.I.C. in carrying out its primary mission, and is
consistent with the tri-polar policy of the social services node.
2. The one-stop career center use has a parking requirement of 42 parking
spaces (1 space per 300 square feet of floor area per City Zoning
Regulations), and P.I.0 presently provides 53 parking spaces which meets
City parking standards. The commercial building meets the City parking
requirement as 76 spaces are required, and 86 are provided.
3. The use will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons
living or working at the site or in the vicinity.
4. The use is appropriate at the proposed location as it is compatible with and
complimentary to the existing uses in the Campanile Building. In addition,
the County Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the use is
compatible with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan.
5. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, with mitigation, was
adopted for the General Plan Amendment GP 145-97 on December 17,
1997. The proposed use or similar type of use was anticipated at the time
of environmental review and no further review is required.
Conditions
1 . The "one-stop" career center shall not exceed a ratio of 60% P.I.C.
employees and 40% other agency employees. The applicant shall submit an
annual report of employee operations including the number of employees by
agency and the anticipated employee hours of work at the site to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
2. To ensure that there are no significant parking demands associated with
group events such as workshops, the applicant shall submit a Trip Reduction
and Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Community
Development Direction. The plan shall include: a schedule of group functions
and events; demarcation of those areas reserved for employee parking and
client/customer parking; and how overflow parking will be handled. The plan
should also include automobile trip and parking reduction strategies such as
carpooling, van-pooling, bicycling and public transportation. The applicant
could offer employees and clients incentives such as free bus passes and/or
other compensation for utilizing these strategies.
��78
Administrative Hearing Minutes
June 19, 1998
Page 9 _
3. The use permit shall be reviewed in one year (approximately June 20, 1999),
or at any time that reasonable written complaints are received by the City of
San Luis Obispo. At the review hearing, the Hearing Officer may modify,
add, or delete conditions, or revoke the use permit. Specifically, the Hearing
Officer may require additional parking and/or explore the possibility of
requiring off-site workshops for the use. A basis for revocation shall be
failure to comply with the above-stated conditions.
/-79
FR?SER
SEIPLE
VITMIM
June 18, 1998
Zoning Hearing Officer
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Use Permit Application A 100-98; Private Industry Council
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are writing on behalf of our client,Walter Brothers Properties,to recommend against approval
of the above referenced use permit application.
While we understand the City Council's direction to this applicant,we continue to maintain that
this expansion of the existing P.I.C.operations is a de facto relaxation of, and therefore statutorily
conflicts with, General Plan tri-polar policies governing the placement of public serving
governmental and quasi-governmental offices.
More immediately important to the general public,the introduction of expanded public-serving
office functions on this commercial service site will dearly exceed the parking capabilities of the
facility and introduce potentially unsafe traffic maneuvers along the South Higuera Street corridor.
Previous public hearing testimony has established the parking conflicts that currently exist at
3566 South Higuera Street and now impact neighboring properties. The expansion of career
center functions there, especially the introduction of large training groups and additional office
employees,will exacerbate this situation. The agreement we understand has been made
permitting access to a portion of the County Social Services Center overflow parking requires a
pedestrian transit of over 900 feet across one of the citys busiest traffic arteries,to and from an
unpavedlot
Finally,it does not appear that a transportation study has addressed the introduction of the kind
of additional peak ingress and egress maneuvers that will occur at the Higuera Street driveway to
this property. Of particular concern are left turns across traffic and center lane queuing.
Please consider these issues during deliberations on this item. Thank for your attention.
Sincerely,
&Prinncipal
uglas Fraser, AIA
FRASER SEIPLE ARCHrrECTs
971 Osos Street
San Luis Obispo
California 93401
tel:805 544-6161
fix:805 544-6183
e-mail:archaff® /410
06/19/1552 11:50 205512020c
pa" Fax Note 7672
TO Sohn Shoals
`°lp'C %i ., of S • 1- •D - `°'°''owFI,S V"s1e Co
"� - "n ku k S MIS t') Lm " n "s olo,sdooaa.o" _
s.0 81 - -717''5 � FIX
epo5-9a Y-0rO& Tmmo�esV3. 95pe
r oma. pD, ❑R, pcdbwo
805 922 4ss, 805 513-9688 805-7363407mmom .
201 EaA Main 35M S.Kguera SL 1220 a/230 205 W.Ocean Avenue
Same W4 CA 93454 San Lub Onlspa.CA 93401 Lompoc.CA 93438
AnN:JOHN SHOALS JUNE 19,1998
CJIY OF S.LO.
FAX#781-7173
IJ REGARDS TO THE ADMR1mSTRATIVE HEARING APPLICATION RA100.98 AT 3566 S.
HIGUERA STREET,SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA
INCLOSED IN THIS FAX YOU WILL FIND A COPY OF THE LETTER WE SENT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION IN JANUARY,1998 ON SIMILAR SUBJECT WITH THE SAME
COMPANY.
AS THE FORMER OCCUPANT OF THE FACILITY IN QUESTION AND ALSO A NEIGHBOR OF
THE VACILITY WE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE SOME THOUGHTS WITH YOU.
WE SPENT EVERY DAY OBSERVING OR OCCASIONALLY BEING INVOLVED IN FLARE-UPS
ABOUT PARKING. WE OF OBSERVED THREATS OF VIOLENCE AND FREQUENT USE OF
VULGARITY. THERE WAS OCCASIONAL TOWING OF VEHICLES.IN OUR EIGHT YEARS
THERE WE NEVER HADA VEHICLE TOWED,NOR DID WE SUBSCRIBE TO VIOLENCE OR
VULGARITY. HOWEVER,WE WERE SUBJECTEDTO IT FREQUENTLY.IT WAS ALMOST A
DAILY ACCURANCE. ITWAS AN EXTREMELY UGLY E NPEREINCE AND WE HAVE NO
DESIRE TO SEE IT AGAIN. THEY HAD SEVERAL TENENTS TRY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM
BY USING OFF-SITE PARKING IT WORKED FOR A BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME THEN IT STOPPED
WORKING.WE FIRMLY BELIEVE IF YOU CANNOT MEET YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENT
ON-SITE IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. WE FEEL IT IS THE C17Y'S OBLIGATION NOTTO
ALLOW PROPERTY OWNERS (OR BUILDINGS)TO INUNDATE THE ENTIRE AREA. IT
SIMPLY IS NOT FAIR TO SUBJECT 711E SURROUNDING FACILITIES OR FOR THAT MATTER
THEIR OWN TENEN7S TO THE FIASCO THAT WILL FOLLOW.
P.S. MY EMPLOYEES HAVE INFORMED ME THAT P.I.C.CLIENTS DO PARK IN FRONT DF
OUR BUILDING WHICH IS A COMPLLTI.Y SEPARATE BUILDING. )
/R2
PIANOS ORGANS BAND INSTRUMENTS SHEET MUSIC SERVICE
~LJ l
bo/15i ly�o 11:�jiJ t-'UbDLou uv,_r:o
OWENS MUSIC COMPANY, INC.
3536 S. HIGUERA#220 201 E, MAIN ST. 205 W. OCEAN AVE.
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA SANTA MARIA,CA LOMPOCs CA
543-9588 922.4551 736-3407
PLANNING COMMISSION,
RECENTLY,WE WERE INFORMED OF A MEETING TO CHANGE'CHE ZONING
IN THIS AREA SO PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNSEL CAN BRING OTHER
GOVERNMENT SERVICES INTO THE ZONE- WE-rH0U0HT WL' SHOULD TAKE'll IE
TIME TO SHARE SOME THOUGHTS WITH YOU.
AS WE ALL KNOW,SAN LUIS OBISPO IS HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME
COMPETING FOR RETAIL BUSINESS AND&TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF OUR
RETAIL BUSINESS,(i.e. TAX DOLLARS)IS GOING TO OTHER CITIES( SANTA MARIA
AND PLACES WITH MORE SHOPPING AREA) SO IT SEEMS WE ARE BEING A BIT
FOOLISH TRADING OFF AREAS ZONED FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL RETAIL AND
SERVICE AND ZONING IT FOR GOVERNMENT FACILITIES.
ONCIr YOU APPROVE THIS ZONING CHANGE IT IS JUST A MATTER OF TIME
BEFORE RETAIL AND INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES ARE REPLACED BY GOVERNMENT
FACILITIES. WE CAN TELL YOU FIRST HAND ABOUT IIOW GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES GROW AND EXPAND.
WE WERE ONE OF THE FIRST OCCUPANTS OF CAMPANELLA PLAZA WHEN
WE FIRST MOVED THERE IN FEBRUARY 19891T WAS NATIONAL AUTO BODY,
WHICH OCCUPIED THE FRONT AND BACK OF THE BUILDINGS. EVERYTHING IN
BETWEEN WAS TO BE SERVICE AND RETAIL SIIOPS. IT REMAINEI)THIS WAY ,
FIRST WITH A RETAIL BOAT STORE AND LATER A FURNITURE STORE BETWEEN
NATIONAL AUTO BODY'S OFFICE IN THE FRONT AND OWENS MUSIC. AFTER
SEVERAL YEARS NATIONAL AUTO BODY CLOSED. P.I.C.TMN TOOK OVER THE
FRONT OFFICES. SLOWLY EACH YEAR AFTER THAT THEY EXPANDED. AF EK
THE THIRD EXPANSION WE OOT A LITTLE NERVOUS SO WE ASKED IF THEY
INTENDED TO EXPAND FURTHER. SINCE WE WERE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THEM
BY THEN. WE WERE TOLD, BY THE P.I.C. MANAGER,THEY WERE NOT
EXPANDING FURTHER A FEW MONTHS LATER WE RECEIVED AN EVICTION
NOTICE.
WE WERE NEVER LATE WITH RENTAL PAYMENTS , WE DID NOT CREATE
PROBLEMS FOR THE LANDLORD AND WE WENT'OUT OF THE WAY TO
COOPERATE WITI I 011ffiR TENANTS. WE GOT AN EVICTION NOTICE BECAUSE
P.I.C. WANTED TO EXPAND.
( II
1' 02
06/19/1998 11:50 80592808^' OWENS MUSIC PAVE 03
1IERF wE HAVE n RETAIL BUSINESS WHO. IN GSSFNCE,HAS BEEN IN SAN
LUIS OBISPO SrNCE THE 195VS( AS BENNE7T MUSIC AND FROM 1973 AS OWENS
MUSIC). AFTER THE EVICTION NOTICE WE GAVE CONSIDERABLE THOUGHT TO _
LEAVING SAN LUIS OBISPO AND POSSWLY RELOCATING IN FIVE CITIES OR
ATASCADERO. HOWEVER,WF.HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN LOYAL
TO US OVER THIS YEARS, AND WE REALLY DO LOVE SAN LUIS OBISPO SO WE
DECIDED TO RELOCATE IN TOWN.
WE ARE NOW VERY CONCERNED ABOUT OUR DECISION. IF THE ZONING 15
ALLOWED TO 01ANGE IT WELL COMPLETELY CHANGE THE MAKE-UP OF THE
AREA AND MAKE IT HIGHLY UNDESIRABLE FOR RETAIL AND SERVICE
BUSINESSES. NO SERVICE OR RETAIL BUSINESS,OUTSIDE OF THE FOOD
INDUSTRY,WANTS TO BE IN THE MIDST OF GOVERNMENT FACILITIES.
ON ANOTHER MATTER.SINCE WE WERE 7'HE TENANT THAT CAME OUT OF
THE FACILITY THEY ARE NOW ADDING.WE FEEL 1T 15 IMPERATIVE THAT YOU
REALIZE THAT WHEN WE WERE THERE,WE HAD ONLY EIGHT(S)PARIUNO
PLACES ALLOCATEDIO US. OF THE EIGHT.(8)PARKING PLACES ONLY FIVE(5)
WERE REALLY AVAIL ABLE TO US,WE COULD NEVER USE THE OTHER THREE(3)
AS THEY WERE ALWAYS OCCUPIED BY OT"ERS. IN THE EIGHT YEARS WE WERE
THERE THE ONE THING WE CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME
THE ONLY PARKING PLACES AVAILABLE WERE THE THREE(3)PLACES IN FRONT
OF OUR STORE, SUITE 203. THEY WERE ONLY VACANT BECAUSG WE
CONSTANTLY ASKED PEOPLE NOT TO PARK (THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE
WHO EITHER PARKED THERE OR TRIED TO WERE P.I.C. CUSTOMERS). IT WAS AN .
EXTREMELY IJAD SITUATION. NOW YOU WANT TO PUT OFFICES IN THERE WITH
SEVENTEF,N(17)EMPLOYEES. IF YOU DO THE MATH YOU SEE THE
IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE SITUATION. WE HAVE HEARD THEY,P.I.C., ARE LOOKING
FOR OFF SITE PARKING. REMEMBER,ONCE YOU CHANGE THE ZONING AND
ONCE YOU ALLOW TI IFM TO GO AHEAD WITH THEIR EXPANSION, IT WILL BE
NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDO. UNLESS THEIR OFF SITE PARKING AGREEMENTS
ARE TWENTY FIVE(25) YEAR UNBREAKABLE CONTRACTS YOU ARE GOING TO
HAVE PROBLEMS. IF THEY LOSE THERE OFFSITE PARKING THEY ARE GOING TO
CLOG THE ENTIRE AREA.THEREFORE,OUR FEELING 1S NOBODY SHOULD BE
ALLOWED IN, ESPECIALLY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, IF THEY CANNOT MEET
THEIR PARKING REQUIREMENTS ONSITE.
WE BF.0 YOU NOT TO SUBJECT US TO THE FIASCO THAT WILL OCCUR IF
YOU CHANGE THE ZONING, DO REMEMBER 771IS WAS NAMED "CAMPANELLA
PLAZA" NOT GOVERNMENT PLAZA.
4. c�st��
(2)
/45
RECEIVED
ATTACHMENT 5 'JUN 2 91998
CRY OF SIN LUIS O9I5P0
BURRING DNfS1Ot!
CL If INTERVEST * BOX 3990 • SANTA BARBARA, CA * 93130
Ron Wizen,Zoning Hearing Officer
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
June 29, 1998
Regarding Permit Application#A-1 D0-98. -Conditional Use Permit for the Private Industry Council and their
proposed addition of services, including the Epp.
This letter,Is a LETTER of APPEAL regarding the Use Permit and tts Inadequate conditions,that
Zoning Department Issued to Mr. Ferraro and the Private Industry Council on Friday,June 19, 1998the City
:
.The City and the Zoning Department have many letters on record from not only myself, but our tenants as well.
Please refer to those letters-the problems have not changed and will only get worse with the new permit
Please supply me with the original parking plan for time Campanile Building and any and all amendments and or
changes to that original plan, along with the justifications of the amendments. Mr. Ferraro only presented a plan
sketch, and not to scale and certainly not a plan that would have
presented it in the form Mr. Ferraro presented it. The parking at the Campanile Building is of such impasportance to
the City If an individual busin h d
the entire neighborhood it should be done in a proper manner, instead of by ask ch that is not to scale.
I am again objecting to the Private Industry Council usage because of the lack of ON SITE parking.
Don Owens, of Owen's Music, called me June 19th, 1998. He called me today, June 29th. He states, "when I was
a tenant at the Campanile Building, in the same unit that the Private Industry Council is applying for, l was supposed
to have eight(8) parking spaces that were alloted to my square footage. I had to fight to keep three open for my use.
I needed my alloted parking spaces, but they said there was not enough parking at the Campanile Building to give me
my alloted front parking. Now, the Private Industry Council is applying for the same square footage, they are saying
there is enough parking to let them occupy the unit Where did the extra parking places appear from 7" Now that he
has moved his business to Teriv ise Park, they are still trying to take his parldng places by illegally occupying
Tenwise's parking places. ft is bad for our businesses to have them take the parking places our customers should be
able to drive right into, instead of having to look for a place." The problem is-the Prfvafe Industry Council clears their
parking at the Campanile But7ding every day they think they might be inspected. This misleads the City Zoning people.
Since the meeting of June 19, 1998, there have been calls, and I have made calls, to my tenants. They are very
upset that their businesses will be interrupted because of the encroachment of the Private Industry Council upon
Tenwise Park property. On Tuesday morning, June 23, 19981 received a phone call from a tenant who said,
'Well,they must have gotten the permit they are already parking in Tenwise Park more than before. Their lot is
full and they are over here again". Another phone call produced the comment, "the Campanile parking lot is
completely full except for one parking space at the very rear of the Central Coast Children's Gymnastics, and
WHY does the
they have eight to ten vehicles in Tenwise s back parking lot. Campanile think that because !
choose not to pave an area in my parking lot that it belongs to them I1( R DOES NOT, and I want them to
stay aff Of my property. Their liability, and the City's, is as great as mine when they are given a Use Permit
beyond that parking which a private business would not be given and they trespass on Tenwise Park property.
I am meeting with my contractor on Monday, June 29, 1998 in preparation for chains and a different ingress and
egress pattern at Tenwise Park This protection is necessary in order to preserve the integrity of Tenwise Park
/-07 `
Under NO circumstances will I give my permission for the Campanile Building and its occupants or customers
ise my parking lots. This means at ANY TIME,ON ANY DAY. They do not.have my permission to trespass.
.ey are warned, as they have been many times before;they will be towed at their own expense, and if there are
problems my tenants will call the City of San Luis Obispo police to sort them out There could be frequent
calls for help. My tenants will not tolerate the destruction of their businesses because of lack of parking.. There
has already been a lawsuit, toward the City, mentioned in these-distrOSSful conversations with the tenants. We
feel we are being discriminated against because we are only private businesses instead of government oriented.
Why do government oriented businesses think they have a right.to use the private sector parking. We pay a lot
to maintain our parking. A good percentage of the cost goes to defending our property from the Private Industry
Council.
I am also going to follow up with the State of California and any Federal Entity involved with proper areas for the
handicapped. When the Futon for Less was considered for Tenwise Park,the City required us to put in a van
accessible handicapped parking in the front, besides the regular handicapped parking space. This is certainly
discrimination when we private sector businesses must provide van accessible places for the handicapped and
the government oriented businesses do not. Especially the Private Industiy Council, EDD and the rest of the
social services that are supposed to be catering to the people in need of jobs and job training,which should
involve many more handicapped people at their Campanile Building than it does at a private sector building, such
as my Tenwise Park
As the Conditional Use permitting agency,the City of San Luis Obispo should require the Private Industry Council
to provide the City with all workshop registrations and headcounts and the employees present at the Campanile
Building for any purpose during the last year. They should also be required to provide the City with the exact count
of all people using the Private Industry Council for any purpose. The Government Agencies and any others involved
with providing grants or any other assistance most surely requires these reports, and it behooves the City of San
Luis Obispo to require the exact reports that are submitted to the other government agencies or grant providers and
v other entity that the Private Industry Council must report to(even though the City may not be aware of the
_,.act names of these providers). The same requirement should be required to be submitted to the City of San Luis
Obispo from any other social service entity wishing to occupy the Campanile Building premises. This is only fair to
the private sector businesses adjacent to the Campanile Building. This requirement by the City of San Luis Obispo
should also include the full names, addresses,telephone numbers and any other pertinent information which the
government or grant agencies require of the Private Industry Council, EDD and other social services in order to get
their funding. These reports should be a matter of public record and provided to the City upon request How else
can the City of San Luis Obispo make a qualified judgment in the granting of.a Conditional Use Permit for such a
high-end user, in such a confined and restricting location.
Please REPEAL the Conditional Use Permit To expand a problem that is al>eedv too big is a mistake, and will
lead to many more unpleasant situations for everyone concerned, including the City of San!Luis Obispo, and the
people who come to the Private Industry Council, EDD and the other social services for help. The people who
come forjob help don't need the headaches of a parking problem, when they should.be .going to a building that has
adequate parking only two blocks north of here and without having to hike from the rear of the Campanile Building and
without the stress of having their vehicles towed at their expense because they are parked illegally on someone
else's property. People without jobs certainly don't need the added expense of towing bills; but my tenants and I
need to protect our own property,and we will in every legal way possible. Why do government oriented businesses
have to encroach upon people who are already out there trying to make a living I I I Do they want (need) more
unemployed people to fill their classrooms. The Private Industry Council calls them 'workshops", but they are still
classrooms no matter what the nomen. Even without their classroom days, there is not adequate parking for the
Private Industry Council to occupy that long narrow building without People thinking.they can use our parking tots
Two blocks north of the Campanile Building there is a large complex,the Waiter Center,which was built exactly for
government oriented businesses. The owner was required to pay for stoplights, bus stops and put in a three story
idng facility. Why doesn't government oriented business use those existing buildings instead of encroaching
ron the private sector. There is a large vacancy factor at the Walter Center, so there is plenty of room at that
facility for more government oriented businesses and social services. 1 thought government and its oriented
businesses were supposed to be downsizing instead of causing the private sector more expense. If they want one-
C1TYofSLO.oic.9R 7 YIR /-8
stop shopping for government and other social services, then the one-stop should be in the same Center where
most of the government oriented businesses are presently located, NOT two blocks south with no connecting
sidewalks and crosswalks and inadequate parking where they are encroaching upon my private parking lots. When -
there is adequate space and adequate parking at the Walter Center that is where they should be located instead of
making we private business people fight them off every hour of every day. We would like to spend that time making
a living instead of policing our own parking lots against trespassers, so our own customers have parking. We can
not make a living without our parking spaces and the Private Industry Council is trespassing every day.
The Private Industry Council has marked parking spaces in front of other businesses occupying the Campanile
Building. If spaces are to be marked and designated at the Campanile Building then it seems feasible to allow the
existing businesses such as the FIT Store, Clutch Masters, NAPA Auto Parts, Monterey Imports and the Children's
Central Coast Gymnastics to have properly marked and allocated spaces in hent of their own businesses. There is
not adequate parking in the rear for these other businesses at the Campanile Building, for them=to have allocated
spaces in the front as well, These front parking spaces should incorporate the proper proportions of Handicapped
Van Accessible spaces. There are not enough parking spaces at the Cartpanila Building to accommodate for
any Handicapped Van Accessible spaces if the Private Industry Council is allowed to
There should be Handicapped Van Accessible spaces TODAY for the Private Ind expand into another unit
ile
Building-there are not Why is Tenwise Park required to have Handicapped Van Accessible f the Private InCouncil at the dustry
.Council doesn't? We're glad to provide space for the Handicapped Van Accessible, as long as they are coming
to do business et ourp/aces of business. The Private Industry Council should be too, but they don't have them, and
Mr. Ferraro stated at the last Zoning Hearing that the State inspected his premises and did not require him to have
aLny Handicapped Van Accessible spaces. Discrimination against the private sector? Looks like it
Sincerely,
Carolyn Larson,Trustee
for Tenwise Park, DBA: CL 11 Intervest
cc: Mayor Settle and The City Council of San Luis Obispo,
All Tenants of Tenwise Park_
San Luis Obispo County- Human Services Division
Santa Barbara County-Job Training Network North County
State of California- Developmental Disabilities Department
State of California- Education Department
State of California-Fire Marshall
State of California - Health Services Department
State of California - Industrial Relations Department
State of California-Rehabilitation Department
State of California-Social Services Department
State of California-State Assemblyman Tom Bordanaro
State of California-State Senator Jack O'Connell
United States Department of Health and Human Services
United States Labor Department-Employment Standards Administration
United States Department of Veterans Affairs
United States Congresswoman- Lois Capps
Veteran's Services Programs-Veteran's Affairs
P
Y .
CD M p,1 6 1998
July 1, 1998 ATTACHMENT 6 ""�JYDEV�SpBI
ft0 ,y o
W. Ronald Whisenand,Hearing Officer
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: Use Permit Appl. A 100-98(Private Industry Council); and
CL II Intervest Letter of Appeal(Dated 6/29/98
Dear Mr. Whisenand:
For the public record,we are providing this letter to you in the interest of correcting various
assertions made in the subject letter of appeal. We recognize the need to take every step
possible to provide factual information in this process, and we are disappointed whenever
incorrect information might be offered on our behalf with respect to this project.
Please note the following, and true,facts in relation to some of the comments offered in the
letter of appeal:
"...many letters on record from not only myself, but our tenants as well." We are sure,in the
past when Bob Mann Sports and the former auto body shop were in the Campanile Center,
there were many letters of complaint. Towing of cars and misuse of parking was prevalent.
But that was then, and this is a different time. We talk, once every 45 days,with each tenant
in the Campanile and Tenwise Park buildings to be sure our customers are not parking in the
wrong places. These businesses have our business cards, and our front office reception staff
observe where our customers park. To my knowledge,the only local tenant that is vocal
about parking is Owens Music.
When Owens Music was in the Campanile Building, and shortly after the PIC arrived there,
Mr. Owens asked me if he could have an additional parking space exactly in the middle of our
street frontage parking strip. Without hesitation,we gave it to him and had it labeled as such.
But where his business was positioned in the order of things, he did not always have the best
luck attracting customers...and,much of the time(especially in the noon hour and from 4-6 .
p.m.), his spaces were lost to customers of Gold's Gym. For their part,the gym customers did
not precisely understand the parking identification system. It is greatly improved,now.
"...original parking plan for the Campanile Building and any and all amrendments...Mr.
Ferraro(Ferrero)only presented a plan sketch, and not to scale... " The parking plan we
have provided is one given to us by the property management company. True,it is not to
scale and does not reflect precise positions of everything,but it serves the needs of describing
35fi6 Sam6 lGgaera Stmxt ■ Saite 100 ■ San lids Obispo ■ PaOfomia ■ 93401 ■ 0051781-2200 ■ Fax le l 5414117 /r o y
Page 2
parking allocation patterns. The property managers do have up to date, and scale diagrams if
those are requested.
"The problem is—the Private Industry Council clears their parking at the Campanile
Building every day they think they might be inspected This misleads the City Zoning
People." The employees of the Private Industry Council have, since the Fall of 1997,been
parking their cars in the spaces provided for the PIC at the rear and backside of the Campanile
complex This clears the 3040 spaces on the side and front portions for our customers. This
is a business decision, and we have no way of detecting the travels of City staff during routine
visits to this area. There are times,by the way,when customers of neighboring businesses
secure some of those spaces. If a non-PIC vehicle is in one of our spaces for more than half
the day,we place a note under the windshield wiper blades to advise them to park elsewhere,
the next time they visit this area.
"On Tuesday morning, June 23, !9981 received a phone call from a tenant... 'Their lot is full
and they are over here again. '" We reviewed our visitor sign-in sheets and the calendar for
our meeting areas, and there was only one significant event that particular morning: our
monthly meeting of the 19-member board of directors. Furthermore,we had a surplus of
parking spaces up front that day, as we do nearly every day. And,the board members are as
cognizant as the staff are with respect to where and how they park,because they cone here
once each month. I do not believe PIC customers were parking at the neighboring property.
"Why does the Campanile think that because I choose not to pave an area in my parking lot
that it belongs to them!!!""Customers of both gym businesses use the unpaved area, and it
usually is accessible to a truck-type vehicle. Two years ago,I personally proposed to Mrs.
Larson that we work together to have that area redesigned, paved, and marked. And, if
economically feasible,the PIC would participate in helping finance the job. It would only
help us if more parking capacity could be developed. She indicated to me that upon the
advice of her legal counsel, it cannot be touched. Whatever the case,the PIC does not view
this dirt area as something that belongs to us.
"I am meeting with my contractor...in preparation for chains and a different ingress and
egress pattern at Tenwise Park" This comment was also offered at the June 10s
Administrative Hearing. Personally,we think this is unwise and probably even unsafe.
References to lawsuits and "distressful conversations with tenants"are more from the past.
We also do not perceive private businesses suffering at the hands of government-oriented
interests. The chain idea would only serve to further restrict parking options for all parties
concerned and it would likely pose significant liability exposure with respect to motorcyclists
during early morning and late evening hours with insufficient light. In short,this is a
dangerous and misguided alternative.
"This is certainly discrimination when we private sector businesses must provide van
accessible places for the han&capped and the government oriented businesses do not." We
think this is an inaccurate statement. The Campanile property also has van accessible parking
spaces and this property must comply with those rules. The enforcement is equal and even.
At the end of her letter(on page 3),Mrs. Larson notes, "...and Mr. Ferraro(Ferrero)stated at
�-88
Page 3
the last Zoning Hearing that the State inspected his premises and did not require him to have
My handicapped Van Accessible spaces. Discrimination against the private sector?Looks
like it." Her remarks are untrue. The State of California Employment Development
Department did inspect the premises(inside and out,because they must do that before
authorizing the movement of any of their field operations into any premises). They did not
require us to have any spaces,because adequate and marked spaces are already in place. In
other words,the property is in compliance with their requirements. However,we will double
check to determine if we need a larger size space for certain particular`vans" as Mrs. Larson
is suggesting.
Back to page 2 of Mrs.Larson's letter, "...the City of San Luis Obispo should require the
Private Industry Council to provide the City with all workshop registrations and headcounts
and the employees present at the Campanile Building for arty purpose during the last year."
Well,that information is certainly available but this is not the most important information to
look at. It might make more sense to examine"origin of visit, length of visit, and purpose of
visit"and to also think about the efficiencies that may be achieved by combining the
appropriate agency staff together to simplify the effort of common customers,reduce travel,
duplicate visits, and so forth-
Later
orthLater in this same paragraph: "...it behooves the City of San Luis Obispo to require the exact
reports that are submitted to the other government agencies or grant providers and any other
entity that the Private Industry Council must report to... " This is all public information,but I:
can assure you there is absolutely no relationship whatsoever between the sort of data Mrs.
Larson is curious about, and the information in the reports that are sent weekly, monthly,
quarterly, and annually to the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California(governor,
legislature, public interest groups,etc.), and the U.S.Dept. of Labor(Region IX in San
Francisco and the National Office in Washington,D.C.). This would be a paper chase with no
inherent significance.
"The people who come for job help don't need the headaches of a parking problem, when
they should be going to a building that has adequate parking only two blocks north of here... "
This is territory we have crossed over before, and a related reference is found in the closing
paragraph on page 2: "There is a lige vacancy factor at the Walter Center, so there is plenty
of room at that facilityfor more government oriented businesses and social services. I
thought government and it's oriented businesses were supposed to be downsizing instead of
causing the private sector more expense."
We have made random observations most of the past year to see how the parking is at the
Walter Center. It is also cramped,there is not a uniformly available portion of space to park
vehicles, and we know many of the customers who seek services there: they do not find it to
be a useful location to seek help. Furthermore,the county's Dept. of Social Services vacated
that building long ago because it is cramped,difficult to work in,unpleasant, and not
customer or employee friendly. With respect to government downsizing,the"privatization"
of public services is exactly what is being proposed in the One-Stop: portions of public
entities,with common needs and customers,joining together in a location that costs half as
much to rent as other locations and is also positioned in and around employers in order to set
�-89
Page 4
the tone that`work is positive"and `work is important." By the way,technically the Walter
Center model is not a"one-stop." It is a co-location of disparate government entities which
has no mandate, and makes no effort,to combine and blend operations for the mutual
convenience of customers and those various state agencies. As such,when the car stops,the
confusion begins. At the One-Stop Center here, and for all employment and training needs
only, agency staff are cross-trained and services are built into a single package.
As you probably know,we were delighted that permission was granted to operate this activity
in areas other than that one location in the community. Additionally,we supported efforts by
the City of San Luis Obispo to relax the restrictions imposed on the Walter Center in order to
obtain a more comprehensive mix of rental clientele.
"The Private Industry Council calls them workshops, 'but they are still classrooms no matter
what the nomen(nomenclature)." This same discussion occurred at the Airport Land Use
Hearing on February 18a', and that commission independently determined that the One-Stop
would be conducting`workshops"and not"classes." The basis for that conclusion was the
fact that these are short-term, one-time,free-standing offerings. These tend to have smaller
numbers and are easier to manage than an ongoing classroom operation. This was the
primary reason why they had no issues with the One-Stop,or concentrations of people
beneath the county airport flyway. In addition,the One-Stop Center will only be involved
with referrals to education and training classes through contracts with certified public and
private education sources elsewhere around the county or in neighboring counties.
"The Private Industry Council has marked spaces in front of other businesses occupying the
Campanile Building." That is correct,and it only applies in the case of Monterey Imports and
Clutch Masters. The owner(the same person owns both businesses) specifically asked us to
"swap"some of our spaces in the back alley with several of those at his storefront. That idea
was very favorable to us, and the property managers took care of it since we both wanted it
that way. Incidentally,Mrs. Larson mistakenly lists three auto businesses in that area of the
complex In reality,it is one business. The third one she lists,Napa Auto Parts,is actually an
advertising sign for a product used at that business in automobile repair work
The Campanile Building has only four tenants:
• Private Industry Council (PIC).
• Clutch Master&Monterey Imports.
• Furniture Installation Team(F.I.T.).
• Central Coast Gymnastics School.
Conclusion
We recognize Mrs. Larson's letter was prepared during a time of concern and emotion. We
learned long ago that parking issues on this property, and virtually every other enterprise in
the City of San Luis Obispo, is less than ideal. We also learned,right after we arrived in this
building that the best solutions are those where all parties come to the table and present their
concerns and resolve them equitably. -That is how the tenants in this complex tend to talk to
one another when isolated issues arise.
/�90
Page 5
I have met a few times with Mrs. Larson and I must acknowledge there is little opportunity
for compromise. This particular issue would seem to be an excellent candidate for assistance
from the Conflict Resolution Program of the Central Coast, a group with whom we have
supported and worked with in the past. We spend a lot of time with neighboring tenants in
both buildings and we have never failed to reach a solution that is fair to everyone. (Mr.
Owens and I don't always agree on everything but our exchanges are friendly and positive.)
We look out for one another's interests and we make the best of the situations we sometimes
face. In a perfect world, nothing here would be labeled except for the spaces in the parking
lots between South Higuera Street and the two buildings (Tenwise and Campanile).
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have further questions or concerns. We are not
sending this letter to all the parties listed in Mrs. Larson's letter,but you may feel free to
distribute this letter to members of the City Council,City Planning Commission,City Staff,
any other appropriate parties or agencies. Thank you.
Sincerely,
SCUOL3
Lee Ferrero
President& Chief Executive Officer
C: PIC Board of Directors
One-Stop Planning Committee Members
JB Enterprises
Cannon Associates
RECEIVED
JUL 14 1998
CITY OF Y AN LUIS MENT
PO
ATTACHMENT 7 COMMUNITY DEVELOP
July 14, 1998
Mr. Ronald Whisenand,Hearing Officer
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: Use Permit—Data for Planning Commission Meeting
We are providing you with information pertaining to the findings and conditions outlined
in your letter dated July 7, 1998.
60%/40% Staffing Ratio
The total number of staff who will be in the One-Stop Center is 39, of which 27 (69%) are
PIC employees. The other 12 staff are as follows: Employment Development Department
—9,Department of Social Services—2,Area Agency on Aging/American Association of
Retired Persons— 1. This keeps us well within the prescribed 60/40 ratio.
Trip Reduction and Parldng Management Plan
Approximately 40%of our customers are from the North County. Our plan is to divert all
of the North County One-Stop Center traffic to Paso Robles at the Cuesta College North
County Campus. This will help with the following: Reduce the traffic in our San Luis
Obispo office by approximately 40%,thus reducing the need for parking and also helping
the County and City with their trip reduction program. This will also be better for our
customers,as they will be closer to where they reside, and services will be more easily
accessible to them.The other partner agencies will co-locate with us in Paso Robles.
We are in the process of redesigning our orientation/workshop schedule to include three
per week with a maximum of 12 attendees at each session,instead of our current schedule
of one per week with a maximum of 25 attendees. Additionally,we are studying the
possibility of holding all group activities at an offsite location. This part of our"trip
reduction plan" should also address the concerns expressed by the complainant.
PIC clients are seen by appointment only. However, our research shows that, on average,
one person per day comes to PIC without an appointment to receive information or
services.
3566 Sarah fflp a Steel ■ Suit:100 ■ Sea tms OWwo ■ CaEkmia ■ 93401 ■ (80.51781-2200 ■ Fax(M 5414117
Page 2
One-Year.Review of Use Permit
We understand that the Use Permit will be reviewed in one year and we do not anticipate
any problems in meeting the conditionssetforth by the City of San Luis Obispo
previbusly.
Thank.you for your consideration with this;matter and feel free to call me if.you need any
further information.
S.incerel
Lee Ferrero
President& Chief Executive Officer
c_: David Cox
Jenele Buttery"
Beth-Schneider
Cindy Graumann
/= 93
CL II INTERVEST * BOX 3990 SANTA BARBARA, CA * 93130
RECEIVED
JUL 14 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS 081Sp0
Mr. Lee Ferraro COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT
Private Industry Council
3566 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
July 9, 1998
Dear Mr. Ferraro,
it has come to my attention, in the way of tenant complain,that you are parking your private vehicle/s in the
parking lot of Tenwise Park
Since you are the manager of the Private Industry Council on the adjoining property there is no excuse for
you to park on the Tenwise Park premises at any hour of any dav.
I understand that you are a member of the San Luis Obispo Athletic Club, and some of the Tenwise Park
parking lot is for members of the Athletic Club. However, since your business is right next door there is no
excuse for you to EVER use Tenwise Parking. You can just as easily walk across your own half of the
common driveway as you can walk across the entire property of Tenwise Park to gain access to the back
parking lot of Tenwise Park Since you undoubtedly work a full eight hour day at the Private Industry Council
there is no way you could be"working out'eight hours a day at the Athletic Club.
It has also been brought to my attention that your Board Members,workshop and career day people are
using Tenwise Parking lots. Please advise them that they will be towed, as you, your employees and
customers will also be towed. I am sending a copy of this letter to the City Council and the City Zoning so
they will be made aware that you said your workshops are Monday 9:30-11:45 a.m. You neglected to tell
the City that you also have Career Days, with many additional people, all day on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and
half days on Thursdays. We are all well aware that you clear your parking lots on the days the City might
inspect Such as the day before, day of, and day after Hearings. Hopefully, they will catch onto your methods
in time to prevent permanent damage to neighboring businesses.
Please refrain from entering the property of Tenwise Park, except to enter your body through the front door of
the Athletic Club. Tenwise Park is private property and I am asking you nicely to refrain from using Tenwise
private parking lots. As private parking lots, I find it necessary to defend the parking from all aggressors in
every legal manner that is applicable.
Sincere ,
Carolyn Larson,Trustee
CL II Intervest for Tenwise Park
CUdg
cc: City Council, City of San Luis Obispo; Zoning Department, City of San Luis Obispo 'D
Certified#Z-194-159-871
fl L
P
y
I
ATTACHMENT 8
.May 21, 1998
TO: RON WHISENAND, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MANAGER
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: LEE FERRERO
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ONE-STOP CAREER CENTER— BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Since 1980, the Private Industry Council (PIC) has provided assistance to unskilled and/or
unemployed county residents to obtain training and employment. The PIC has also helped
local employers obtain skilled and job-ready candidates for their workforce needs.
Other organizations and public agencies in the county also perform similar services, but
they accomplish that work in different ways and in other areas of the community: In early
1997, the PIC and some of these local agencies determined they could help people more
effectively (and save money) if they could move portions of their offices together in a single
location and pool their resources. This made sense because quite often, their customers
had to make repeat visits for assistance or be referred to one of the other offices.
This gave birth to the concept of a "One-Stop" Career Center. The PIC was asked by
these agencies to lease space for their offices where the cost of rent could be shared,
where employees could work together and combine their resources, and where customers
could learn about and receive the full range of services in less time and with less effort.
HOW THIS WOULD BE ORGANIZED
The portions of local offices joining the PIC, are as follows:
• State of California Employment Development Department (EDD).
• County of San Luis Obispo Dept. of Social Services (CalWORKs Program).
• Cuesta College (single office contact point for information and referral).
• Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC) of San Luis Obispo County, Inc.
In addition, there would be "occasional" (or rotating) office space available to smaller local
organizations, including: Central Coast Commission Area Agency on Aging, California
Department of Rehabilitation, Service Corps of Retired Executives, and the Economic
Opportunity Commission.
There will also be "branches" or satellite offices of the One-Stop located in Paso Robles on
the new north county campus of Cuesta College; and in the Grover Beach-Arroyo Grande-
Nipomo areas of the southern portion of San Luis Obispo County. Also, over time,
396 saran W*m sues► ■ S*100 ■ San leis Obispo ■ Carlanda ■ 93401 ■ (805)791-2200 ■ Fax(BUQ 541-4117
Page 2
electronic access to the One-Stop will be made available at the San Luis Obispo:City-
County Public Library and their associated branch libraries; at local offices of the county's
Regional Occupation Program (ROP); at other youth and adult leaming centers and career
counseling offices.
COORDINATION OF RESOURCES AND ACCESS
The end result of the One-Stop system is the distribution of local human services, and
information about those services, throughout the county and out to where people reside
and conduct their other daily business. In effect, those people among the 80-percent of
the county population that do not reside within the San Luis Obispo City limits, will not
necessarily have to commute to the city for services. This will then create other dynamics:
• The employees of these agencies, who now work in San Luis Obispo, will spend
portions of their workweek in other areas of the county at the outlying One-Stop office
branches. This will permit rotation of workers in the One-Stop, reduction of parking
space needs, and trip reduction. For instance, the 30 or so workers associated with the
One-Stop will never be on the main office premises at any single time. We would
anticipate approximately twelve to eighteen employees who will be at the One-Stop site
on a regular basis of 40 hours per week. This equates to a rough average of two
.workers per parked vehicle on the premises.
• The ratio of parking spaces allotted to the PIC property (53) to the amount of square
footage under lease (12,600) conforms easily within the 1:300 standard by the city.
With the rotation schedules of workers (and their related customers) and the scheduling
of group meetings in coordination with high and low period walk-in customer traffic, will
easily accommodate the demand for parking.
• For example, presently the PIC conducts a Monday morning orientation to PIC services
each week, with about 25 customers in attendance. The other agencies do similar
orientations with the same or less frequency, for the same or less numbers of people.
This traffic will easily be spread across the typical week where a °combined orientation°
would occur for all One-Stop customers, three or four mornings per week with an
approximate attendance of 15 people (or less) per morning. Two One-Stop Meeting
Rooms can accommodate up to 45 people collectively.
• Within the context of scheduling visitor traffic, the PIC and their partner tenants will
mutually conduct a carefully constructed and studied "parking management` plan. All
of the agencies are sensitive to this factor and have excellent experience in working
with such issues.
Such operating efficiencies will be realized, across all aspects of the new operation, once
this system is put into place and organized.
Thank you.
Support Documentation— Administrative Use Permit
The Private Industry Council(P.I.C) requests an administrative use permit to consolidate their
job training, education, employer, and job placement services. This is a follow-up to the City
Council action on March 17, 1998 whereby the Council made the following fording(General
Plan Amendment 145-97 -Resolution No. 8781):
"Because of the unique program provided by the Private Industry Council(P.I.C.),the
City Council determines that the proposed use of a one-stop career center in conjunction
with the State of California Employment Development Department(provided it does not
exceed a ratio of 60%P.I.C. employees and 40%other agency employees), is a minor,
incidental, ancillary function of P.I.C. in carrying out its primary mission, and is therefore
consistent with the tri-polar policy, and is a permitted use in the zone upon approval of a
use permit."
The additional employees are accessory to P.I.C.'s job training services and can be
accommodated at the existing site. The following section demonstrates that adequate on-site
parking is provided per City standards.
Parldng
Table 6 of the City's Zoning Ordinance establishes the parking requirements by use. It does not
include an all-encompassing description for P.I.C.'s land use. P.I.C. primarily functions as office
space for employment training services. Based upon the Ordinance,the parking requirement for
land uses of this type is one parking space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. The following
uses all have such a requirement as identified in Table 6:
Employment agencies
❖ Government agency offices
❖ Professional offices
❖ Social service agencies
P.I.C. is a combination of these uses. A parking standard of 1:300 therefore seems the most
appropriate. P.I.C. provides 53 spaces for 12,600 square feet of gross floor area, a ratio of 1
space per 238 square feet. This is 11 spaces (or approximately 25 percent) more than the
required standard.
The 1:300 parking standard takes into account employees and customers for office uses. Most of
the workers at the center rotate shifts and share office space. The average number of workers at
P.I.C. on a given day is 12-18. The average number of workers per parked vehicle is two. This
leaves ample parking for drop-by customers and orientation workshop attendees.The
consolidation of services alleviates the parking demand for various group functions at P.I.C.
The one-stop career center provides centralized services and reduces vehicle trips to scattered
employment agencies within the community.
The Private Industry Council will continue to manage its parking in cooperation with
neighboring tenants and those.in the adjacent commercial center. As an example,P.I.C.
schedules its higher attendance activities around the peak hour activities of neighboring
businesses. P.I.C.'s employees are allotted the parking spaces in the rear of the building to
maintain the most accessible parking for customers.
The City's parking requirements are satisfied for the other tenants in the Campanile Building(see
parking table below). The two auto repair uses have five spaces each. Three spaces are reserved
for the Fitness Installation Team. Central Coast Gymnastics has 20 spaces expressly for their
use.
PARKING STANDARDS
Tenant Size of Space City Parking Parldng Spaces Parldng Spaces
Standard Required Provided
P.I.C. 12,600 sq. ft. 1:300 sq. ft. 42 53
Clutch Masters 2,500 sq. ft. 1:500 sq. ft. 5 5
Monterey Imports 2,500 sq. ft. 1:500 sq. & 5 5
F.I. 1,200 sq. ft. 1:300 sq. ft. 4 3
C.C. Gymnastics 12,000 sq. ft. Per City#A24-95 20 20
Total 76 86
/- 98
P y
I RECEIVED
July 17, 1998
JUL 17 1998
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Carolyn Larson,Trustee
CL II Intervest
Box 3990
Santa Barbara,CA 93130
Dear Carolyn:
I am in receipt of your letter dated July 9th,regarding various concerns with activity at our
business location,and neighboring locations. You appear to have some misunderstandings with
what is occurring at our offices,so please allow me to provide some necessary clarification. In
that light,your letter was directed to me in a personal way. We believe, in contrast to the tone of
your letter, it would be more productive to address the issues of our proposal,rather than my
personal activities.
First,I can address the questions you raise as to how I personally conduct myself here at work. I
have been a member of the San Luis Obispo Athletic Club since 1990. As a general rule,I am
found in the gym at approximately 6:00 a.m.during at least two or three mornings per week.
After I am done at the gym,I usually drive uptown for coffee and the morning newspaper,
returning to my office during opening time. In this routine,I typically drive straight to the gym,
park in the back of the building,and leave by 7:30 a.m. When I return, I park in PIC-designated
parking towards the rear of the building.
My schedule is such,that I do not attend the gym always in the mornings. Sometimes,I do so
after work and only occasionally during the lunch hour. During those times,my car is parked in
the PIC area. You are absolutely correct in noting"...there is no way you could be 'working out'
eight hours a day at the Athletic Club." I wish I were healthy enough to withstand such a
regimen.
You mention that members of our board of directors are using Tenwise Parking lots. That is not
true. They meet here every month,and they are fully aware of the rules as to where they are
supposed to park. Since their meetings are scheduled on a regular basis,and they meet fust thing
in the morning(when we have minimal customer traffic and some of your tenants are not yet
open for business),there are no problems or issues.
You mention "Career Days." You are referring to a once-per-year,summer youth program
activity which took place this year on July 1'and July 81, for six youth(aged 11 and 12)who do
not drive cars but were transported here by a teacher in a single van-type vehicle. You,or
someone you know, probably saw the sign on the door welcoming and directing the teacher and
youth to the location of Career Day,and confused it with the next topic: our"Job Search
Assistance"Workshops.
You mentioned: "You neglected to tell the City that you also have Career Days, with many
additional people, all day on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and halfdays on Thursdays." First of all,as
noted above,Career Day is a separate event from what you are now talking about in the sentence
above. The Tuesday-Thursday activity is an Assessment Workshop that is a follow-up,add-on to
3588 Se Ah 1<Wm Sonet ■ Sone 10(l ■ San Le's 0b*o ■ Uliifordm ■ 93401 ■ (805)181-1200 ■ fax OM 5414111
i- 99
Page 2
the Monday-only"Orientations"we explained earlier. These occur twice per month. We have
been conducting these activities since 1992. They are scheduled well in advance so the numbers
are predictable and managed to conform to our other activities and the rise and fall of other traffic
within the complex. There have never been parking or traffic problems with these meetings.
With the planned One-Stop Center,we will offer the Orientations more frequently and greatly
reduce the extended portions. Overall,we anticipate a general reduction of traffic since these
agencies will be together and customers can obtain more services, more quickly,and with fewer
trips.
You mentioned: "We are all well aware that you clear your parking lots on the days the City
might inspect. Such as the day before, day of, and day after hearings. Hopefully, they will catch
onto your methods in time to prevent permanent damage to neighboring businesses." We do not
know when,or if,the City of San Luis Obispo inspects our parking area or premises. We always
clear our front and side parking lots so our customers have a place to park while our staff park in
the rear of the building. Many employees here are frequently on the road,serving employers and
trainees throughout the county. Some of our staff work reduced hours and a fair portion are
simply outstationed full-time in other offices in other communities. And,some work here full-
time.
Talk to any downtown business in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara,and most other typical cities
and they will tell you that neither they nor their employees park at the front door of their business.
To do so would simply cause the potential loss of yet another customer and sales. They park
away from the front curb so that their customers have better access. We do the same thing,to
make it easier for our customers(not to create illusions for inspectors). To summarize:
• We do not believe there are serious parking problems on this property or yours.
• Our board members,employees,and customers are instructed and aware they are not to park
on or near the Tenwise premises. If mistakes are made(and they are), it is a new customer
who is new to this complex and one who does not understand the layout. (Customers visiting
some of your tenants for the fust time will often park in our side area spaces by mistake...we
either wait for them to leave later or we place a handwritten note under their windshield
wiper blade asking them to park at your building the next time they come here.) This
prevents strife.
• You and Craig are invited to come see our offices,take a tour,and look at how.we operate. I
can explain how we hope to redesign the interior of the offices and how it will all fit together.
The same offer has been made in the past to your tenants,and they have followed up with
interest
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lee Ferrero
President&Chief Executive Officer
c: City of San Luis Obispo
JB Enterprises
iao
• , . w:, 1,:: AttachmeaA-
P y
August 4, 1998
Mr. John Shoals
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: USE PERMIT REQUEST REGARDING A 100-98 PROJECT
(CAMPANILE BUILDING—ONE-STOP CAREER CENTER)
Dear John:
At the July 22, 1998 meeting of the Planning Commission, a letter on this subject was provided
to the commissioners and the city from Mrs. Carolyn Larson representing CL II IlVTERVEST,
the owner of the retail property adjacent to our building. Since we had no opportunity to review
or respond to this letter until receiving it July 31',I wanted you and the Planning Commission to
receive our comments specific to Mrs. Larson's concerns, for the record.
"In PIC's FAX to the City. on June 19. 1998-they clearly show Tenwise Park as part of the PIC
parkingplan labeled, Analysis of Tenant Customer Parking and One-Stop Schedules."'
There is a notation, "possible parking"but that was not inscribed by me or any of our employees.
She is correct by indicating it is her property, and I would assume the notation was put there by
city staff, by mistake, while preparing working documents for the hearing.
"Mr. Ferrero,of the PIC. was being facetious when he states in his July lg letter to the City, `We
recognize Mrs. Larson's letter was prepared during a time of concern and emotion. This is a
political diversion statement Many confrontations have occurred at the Campanile and Tenwise
Park parkin lots at some time involving guns and three police cars at once)."
I was not being facetious or political when I suggested this issue had become too emotional.
While I respect Mrs. Larson's concerns for her property, her rights, and the rights of her tenants,
I also trust the public process to provide an open forum and room for consideration of all
interests. We have attempted to present our case fairly, accurately, and free of emotion.
I am not aware of"many"confrontations in the past, on these properties, involving guns and so
many police cars. There have been few problems in the past when tow trucks were called in to
move cars without giving owners or tenants a chance to explain or move the vehicle when asked.
The time when Bob Mann Sports was a tenant,was a difficult period because I believe they did
not honestly provide the city with true employee and auto counts. They also did not care about
the rules and the rights of other tenants, their employees, and their customers. And, that was
wrong. We do not subscribe to that sort of behavior or approach.
3566 Smnb Mgmra Street ■ SWM 100 ■ Sao Lois Obispo ■ Carhmia ■ 93401 ■ (805►181-2200 ■ Fas(80$5414111
Page 2
At the July 22°a meeting, we did present research by the City of San Luis Obispo Police Dept.
that indicated there had been"...no reported incidents at this address for this time period." (The
yeafs 1995, 19962 1997, and to date this year.)
"Mr. Ferrero tries to make light of it by calling;attention away from the Health, Safety, and
Welfare issues but San Luis citizens have a big stake in protecting themselves."
I do not make light of any of these issues or this project and any impacts it may or may not have
in the neighborhood. We have always maintained that a parking problem for any tenant in any
building anywhere in this part of town, is also a problem for the Private Industry Council. I
believe this way of looking at things is true and possible in most areas in this community. And,
these issues are typically resolved by face-to-face meetings and mutually agreed upon
compromises.
Paragrgnh Five page 1) "It is evident because...etc."
We think there are a variety of inaccurate statements'in this paragraph. Based upon how a one-
stop operates, how the representatives of the other agencies work together, and how the mutual
customers will accomplish more work in less time, and travel around the community less often,
tells us we are doing the right thing. We said in earlier testimony that scheduling of groups more
often and in smaller numbers, with a chance for all the agencies to conduct their business
together(now with mutual customers)will lead to better service and less people spending less
time getting help.
"One on one service" is not the way every customer will be treated. Much of the work in the
center will be self-help. With the plan of requiring all customers north of Cuesta Grade to report
to the One-Stop Center at the Cuesta College North County Campus in Paso Robles, we are
anticipating an even more dramatic reduction in customer traffic. Through electronic technology
at both one-stop centers and eventually the County of San Luis Obispo Library System(main
library and outlying branches), we anticipate even more efficiency.
Mention of"GAIN" needs to be clarified. That program was abolished through national welfare
reform in 1997, and the new program is called "CaIWORKs." The county's Dept. of Social
Services has deployed this new program around the county in four regional offices, further
reducing traffic and multiple customer visits to one geographic point, especially in San Luis
Obispo.
Paragraph Six (page 2) "The Campanile Building is 33,000 square feet...etc."
The comparison of the two properties and their layouts is difficult for me to address and I don't
know how to change that situation, nor do I know how relevairt the comparison is. With respect
to labeling of parking spaces, the schematic was prepared by the property manager, not the PIC,-
the
IC;the property manager relabeled, but did not number, all the parking spaces, not the PIC; the
relabeling took place when the PIC expanded its possession of building footage and the
allocation of all parking spaces were negotiated equitably among all the Campanile tenants.
I would not say the spaces are"reserved." They are"designated." And, I think the designation
helps protect the needs of the tenants in serving their respective customers. I do not think
Tenwise Park parking spaces are heavily utilized by Campanile customers or tenants except by
mistake and unfamiliarity.
Page 3
We are puzzled by the comments concerning: "During a recent mid-afternoon my husband and I
stood in the parking lot behind the San Luis Gym (Athletic Club, not the Gymnastics School)
with our architect and the owner of the San Luis Gym. During the half hour we were there I had
to ask at least 10-12 people who were parking their cars and heading for the Campanile to please
not park at Tenwise." I do not believe those were PIC customers, because that is a long walk
back up to the front of the Campanile building. And, we usually have ample customer parking at
the front end of the complex.
"We are also concerned for the Health Factors because we constantly find very personal debris
on our premises from the Campanile Children's Gym customers• diM and full disposable
diapers is the most frequent of the debris."
This is a local concern that happens in most public areas, I think. It is not right but it is also
usually remedied by just talking to the tenants. Maybe extra trash receptacles are all it would
take to resolve the problem. But I don't think the One-Stop center should be singled out as a
complication for this specific problem.
Para ag a h Eight (page 2) "The PIC reserved parking...etc."
We do not sense the same problems with ingress and egress regarding South Higuera. The
alternate driveway behind Temvise receives little use on a daily basis. The central and common
drive between the buildings is manageable and roomier than most parking lots in newer shopping
areas in this community.
Paragraph Ten(page 2)"Mr. Ferrero states he has tried to negotiate with me. He would like
people to believe I am being unreasonable in protecting my own property rights and those of in
tenants and their San Luis customers."
I have tried to negotiate with Mrs. Larson and I visit monthly with her tenants, personally, to be
sure there is a forum for discussing concerns. I offered, in a 7/23/98 letter to Mrs. Larson, my
willingness and interest in joining her to meet with the Conflict Resolution Program of the
Central Coast. She has not responded as of this date but the interest remains on our part. While
she has told me that the only solution is for the PIC to move away, I have not publicly or
privately said she is being unreasonable. I have offered, more than once,to share the cost of
paving the dirt/grass area on the rear of her property in order to provide more capacity for
parking...maybe even shared parking. She has refused to consider this option, and I recognize
her right to say that. I don't agree with her,because this is one solution(of several others
probably)that could help resolve these issues.
Paragraph Eleven(page 2 and 3)"Even without the PIC expansion...etc."
Stoplights, so close to the Prado Intersection signal, do not seem realistic. We indicated earlier
that the facility satisfies the ratio of handicapped parking to overall parking spaces but if a larger
space was needed for"van accessible"dimensions, we are sure the property owner could do that.
The building interior is not a"maze" and the width of internal aisleways exceeds legal standards
for handicap access. The site plan also indicates creation of a full-length central aisle in all the
suites, from#100 through#203/204. This was determined necessary early in 1997, more for the
ease of workers inside the building. Certainly, this would benefit customers.
l_�Q�
Page 4
The remainder of Mrs. Larson's letter delves into numerous details regarding traffic counts,
parking allocations, and various other concerns with the buildings and liability. Some of this
reiterates earlier comments made in the letter.
Attached to her letter, following the signature page, Mrs. Larson has drawn attention to a
document I produced earlier, entitled "Highlights One-Stop Career Center and Partner Agency
Information." Under the section entitled "Analysis of Tenant Customer Parking and One-Stop
Schedules,"I think she has mistaken the content of the information. Please note:
Our Intention
To present the true nature of customer traffic(rise and fall) at the San Luis Obispo Athletic Club,
Central Coast Gymnastics School, and Monterey Imports & Clutch Masters, as compared to our
plans for regulating customer visits at the One-Stop. This acknowledges that we are sensitive to,
and respect the needs and demands of the entire complex. We study these factors closely, and we
are planning our customer activities accordingly,to relate to the needs of our neighbors.
Mrs. Larson's possible misunderstanding of this sheet
Mrs. Larson has noted, in handwriting, "This is Tenwise Park's property, not the PIC's." She
misses the point with this document: we are not questioning whose property it is nor will we
allow PIC customers to park there. We are aware that SLOAC is a Tenwise tenant.
Thank you for your patience and attention to this letter.
Sincerely,
Lee Ferrero
President& Chief Executive Officer
C: JB Enterprises
Cannon Associates
RECEIVED p v
JUL 3 0 1998 1 J
:CITY OMM�MTy DeVELOPALUIS 08ISPO [Mimi
D V E
JUL 27 1998
D
CANNON ASSOCIATES
July 23, 1998
Ms. Carolyn Larson, Trustee
CL H Intervest
Box 3990
Santa Barbara, California 93130
Dear Carolyn:
This letter is sent in accordance with the suggestion made at last night's meeting of the City of San
Luis Obispo Planning Commission. At that time,the chairperson recommended that it might be
productive for both of us to consider enlisting the services of the Conflict Resolution Program of
the Central Coast to help iron out our various differences regarding the proposed Campanile
Center proposal.
Personally, neither this office nor I have ever had occasion to utilize their services in this way but
we are aware of their successes in a variety of other situations. The comments I hear most often
are that the costs are minimal,the results are quicker, and the results tend to be mutually beneficial
because all parties concerned learn more about the needs of one another.
I think this is worth the effort, and I invite you to share your thoughts on this solution. I have
enclosed a copy of their brochure,which includes ways for you to contact them for more details. I
look forward to hearing from you in the very near future.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lee Ferrero
President& Chief Executive Officer
C: PIC Board of Directors
Ron Whisenand, City of San Luis Obispo
JB Enterprises
Doug Davidson, Cannon Associates
Enclosure
3566 Sod ffalaera SUeet ■ Sade 100 ■ San las 0bbpa ■ Wftna ■ 93401 ■ (805)181-2200 ■ fax(M 541-4111
�-/oS