HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/19/1999, 1 - APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION THAT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT WAS NOT NECESARY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF PROJECT APPLICATION NO. ARC 153-98-A PROPOSAL TO REDED
council
acEnaa
nEpout
C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O
o�1 -19 -99
It. N.
1
FROM: Arnold B. Jonas, Community Development Director p
Prepared By: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner PR
SUBJECT:
Appeal of the Community Development Director's interpretation that a Planned Development
Amendment was not necessary in conjunction with the Architectural Review Commission's
approval of Project Application No. ARC 153 -98 — a proposal to redevelop the existing Central
Coast Mall located on the southeast side of Madonna Road and west of Highway 101.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Draft Resolution A, denying the appeal, and upholding the Architectural Review
Commission's action to approve the project, including approval of a Negative Declaration with
Mitigation Measures, based on findings, and subject to conditions and code requirements.
DISCUSSION
Situation/Project Description
An appeal has been filed of the Architectural Review Commission's (ARC's) decision to grant
final approval to the Central Coast Mall redevelopment project. Appeals of the ARC's actions
are considered by the City Council.
The project is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the same type of
retail uses. The central portion of the mall would be demolished and replaced with new
construction to accommodate an expansion to Gottschalks, three larger tenants (23,625 sq.ft.-
30,000 sq.ft.) and smaller shops (total of 5,000 sq.R.). The reconfigured project with 255,497
sq.ft. of floor space will result in about 2,000 square feet less of building area than currently
exists (258,100 sq.ft.). In addition, the building area shown for the proposed project is about
29,000 square feet less than the maximum retail area approved as part of the original
development plan (285,000 sq.ft.). A pedestrian and automobile boulevard is proposed between
the new central buildings to connect the site with the adjacent Madonna Road Plaza Shopping
Center and ultimately with the planned Marketplace project on the Dalidio property.
Previous Review
On November 2, 1998, the project was initially reviewed by the ARC and received schematic
approval. The Commission direction noted general support for the site plan including the bulk of
proposed tree removals and allowance for some compact parking, tree wells, instead of "finger -
type" planters, and head -in parking spaces. The ARC wanted to see more individuality in
1 -1
Council Agenda Report - . -ppeal of Central Coast Mall Redevelopment Plans
(ARC 153 -98)
Page 2
building designs in general, and directed that the buildings located near Dalidio Drive be moved
further back from the street (at least a 20 -foot setback) and also better address the street. The
ARC also asked the applicant to consider the addition of some type of gateway feature, either an
architectural element or landscaping, at the project boulevard's intersection with Dalidio Drive.
On December 7, 1998, the ARC, on a 6 -1 vote (Commr. Stevenson voting no), approved the
Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and granted final approval to the project, based
on findings, and subject to conditions, mitigation measures and code requirements. The
Commission was especially pleased with changes to enliven the building elevations including:
more differentiation between buildings through the use of varied rooflines and heights; the
addition of more architectural elements; and greater variation in both colors and materials. They
liked the addition of a gateway feature, consisting of a tower element on one side, and planting
with a wall on the other side, at the intersection of the new project boulevard with Dalidio Drive.
Appeal Filed
On December 16, 1998, an appeal of the ARC's decision to grant final approval to the project
was filed by Brian Christensen. The appeal does not cite concerns with the site planning or
building design decisions of the ARC, but instead questions whether the project was properly
processed given the site's Planned Development overlay zoning. Specifically, the appellant feels
that site changes were significant and subject to review of a Planned Development Amendment
by both the Planning Commission and City Council. The appeal also mentions the required
environmental review, but provides no specifics on perceived shortcomings. The appellant did
not attend either of the two public hearings where the project was discussed.
Response to Appeal Issues
Staff feels that the ARC made an informed and appropriate decision in approving the project on
December 7, 1998. The following paragraphs respond to Mr. Christensen's concern with the
Community Development Director's (hereinafter referred to as the "Director's ") interpretation
that the project did not require the processing of a separate Planned Development Amendment
application.
PD Zoning Background
In 1984 when plans for the Central Coast Mall were being reviewed by the City, many in the
community were concerned that the development would have dire impacts on the economic
vitality of the downtown. Despite these concerns, the mall project was approved by the City
through a "PD ", planned development zoning. With the PD, conditions were imposed on the
project including types of uses, maximum square footage of development, required parking,
public improvements, height of the hotel, and lighting. A development plan was approved by the
Planning Commission and City Council, in addition to approval of plans by the Architectural
Review Commission.
1 -2
Council Agenda Report - appeal of Central Coast Mall Redeveiupment Plans
(ARC 153 -98)
Page 3
Current Project
The current project is the physical redevelopment of an already developed commercial site
accommodating the same types of retail uses. The reconfigured project will result in a net loss of
building floor area from that which currently exists. In fact, the original PD called for a retail
commercial center with a maximum floor area of approximately 285,000 square feet. The
proposed redevelopment will actually reduce the overall size of the commercial development to
approximately 256,000 square feet (a net reduction of 29,000 square feet from the maximum
floor area approved by the PD). The proposed project still proposes the majority of the new floor
area to be located between Gottschalks and the hotel. However, the reconfigured project differs
in that the shops will exit onto an outdoor pedestrian walkway, rather than onto an interior mail.
Processing Provisions
SLO Municipal Code Section 17.62.080 outlines the provisions for the review of changes to
approved development plans. Paragraph A. of that section provides discretion to the Director to
evaluate minor differences between approved development plans and proposed changes.
Since development exceptions or modifications to the list of allowed uses are not proposed
(which are the principal purposes behind PD zoning), the issue with the changes to the
"development plan" came down to one of site planning and design. Issues of the design,
placement, and orientation of buildings are addressed through the City's architectural review
process. Therefore, it was the Director's determination that proposed changes to the
development plan were minor and most appropriately handled through review of plans by the
ARC, and that a separate Planned Development Amendment application was not necessary.
Consistency with Adopted General Plan and Council goals
The redevelopment project is consistent with the adopted policies for the General Retail land use
designation contained in the Land Use Element. The proposed retail tenants are envisioned as
providing a regional draw. The General Plan encourages these types of uses to locate in this area
of the city.
The initial study prepared for the project mentions that the proposed new boulevard between
proposed building pads, to link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, and
ultimately with any retail development on the Dalidio property, is consistent with Land Use
Element Policy 3.7. 10 which encourages more cohesion between the existing and planned
shopping centers on Madonna Road. In addition, the improved link with Madonna Plaza is
consistent with the original PD zoning approval which calls for the project to be compatible with
the adjacent commercial development and provide for pedestrian circulation between projects.
The boulevard linkage does not guarantee that all shoppers will park in one spot and walk
between sites, but the designated walkways, which are planned in the parking lots and ultimately
linked with the boulevard, will improve pedestrian comfort and encourage more pedestrian
travel.
1 -3
Council Agenda Report - appeal of Central Coast Mall Redevewpment Plans
(ARC 153 -98)
Page 4
For the 19997 -99 Financial Plan period, the City Council established the revitalization of the
Central Coast Mall and the Madonna Plaza as a Major City Goal. The City's role in
revitalization is described as "encouraging private sector redevelopment efforts and assisting in
coordinating a vision for this effort". This project was seen by staff and the ARC as a way of
realizing these revitalization goals by providing needed changes to what has become a dying
center.
Revitalization of existing Madonna Road shopping centers is also consistent with direction
provided by the Council through their past actions on previous projects. With the denial of the
40 Prado Road project in 1997, the Council noted that existing retail areas in the vicinity should
be revitalized prior to new vacant sites being developed.
Conclusion
Based on the project's design which includes no change in use, an overall reduction in the
development area, and no significant differences in building footprints, the Director agreed with
departmental staff that the changes to the "development plan" were "minor." The Director's
decision was based on the discretion provided to him by SLO Municipal Code Section
17.62.080. The significant differences in the two projects relate to site planning and architectural
design. Since these issues fall into the purview of the ARC and were originally reviewed by
them, the project was processed through applications for architectural and environmental review
with the final discretionary approval of plans made by the Commission.
Added Comments from the CAO
This report has provided a succinct and fair review of the issues related to the appeal. These
additional comments are made to provide more context for the Council regarding the sentiment
existing in the community and among Council members at the time the Council established
"Madonna Plaza and Central Coast Revitalization" as a Major City Goal. In addition, added
comments are offered regarding the project's design, especially the proposed pedestrian and
automobile boulevard linking to the Madonna Plaza.
Context and Background. For a goal to be established as a "Major City Goal ", it requires the
unanimous agreement of the City Council. The Council's high level of consensus for this goal
was the result, at least in part, of two things: First, was the extremely underutilized nature of the
Central Coast Mall and the unimpressive nature of Madonna Plaza. And secondly, the strong
community sentiment expressed during the 40 Prado debate was that the City should focus its
efforts "across the street"; to "make something happen" on already developed but poorly utilized
land, rather than approving a general plan amendment for a new project at a new location.
In order to "make something happen ", the clear message was sent to staff — and included in the
Council adopted work program for this goal — that any such projects should be fast - tracked to the
extent possible within our rules. For example, an Action Step was included in the goal work
1-4
Council Agenda Report - appeal of Central Coast Mall Redevet ;.,neat Plans
(ARC 153 -98)
Page 5
program to: "Coordinate the pre - development and development process with a goal of
processing applications as quickly as possible. "
Despite continuous efforts by staff, Madonna Plaza owners have so far been unwilling to engage
in a major redevelopment of their property. However, after years of delay and discussion, the
owners of Central Coast Mall have finally proposed a plan for redeveloping their property. Their
proposal is more than a "marginal fix ", and instead involves the fairly bold idea of demolishing
inefficient space and replacing it with new buildings that can attract new kinds of tenants —
tenants that are more regional in nature and that many residents now travel elsewhere to visit. By
redeveloping property already developed to provide space for such regional retailers, the City
benefits by retaining more sales tax in our community, and by doing so without having to
develop new property.
Therefore, in working with the mall owners, staff believed that the proposed project was quite
consistent with the Council's interests, and that staff ought to work with the developers to move
the project forward in a timely way. Believing that existing rules allow us to do so, staff erred on
the side of fewer review steps, rather than more review steps. It is now up to the Council to
ultimately determine if this judgment was a correct one, and if not, to send the project back for
more site and design review by the Planning Commission and the City Council.
Design and Roadway. A continent on the proposed site layout is also in order, especially as it
relates to the proposed "boulevard" through the project to the Madonna Plaza. The most ideal
design goal held by both staff and the Council has been that the two separate mall properties
redevelop together in a physically connected way — and in a way that also integrates with the
Dalidio property when that property develops. However, it is clear that this ideal will not be
achieved in the foreseeable future, given the fractured ownership situation and the reluctance by
Madonna Plaza owners to comprehensively redevelop their property at this time.
This leaves the City with two choices: (1) Discourage the development of any property in this
area until they are under a common ownership; or (2) Work with the properties separately, but
encourage design features that allow for the greatest integration possible between the properties.
The only real option before us has been the second one.
For this reason, staff encouraged the developer to include a connection to the Madonna Plaza. In
the absence of this connection, the project would essentially "turn its back" on the Plaza with no
direct link to it. Another option could have been that the project instead "turns its back" on the
Dalidio property, but that design was undesirable for other reasons and, in staffs' view, would
still require a connection to that property for the same reason. The proposed access way will
eventually allow for the enhanced connection of all three properties — perhaps not in the ideal
way, but in a way that makes for a closer relationship between the three separate properties than
if there are no connections.
There are many examples here and elsewhere of projects that provide for pedestrian and
automobile movement between buildings and across pedestrian crossings (e.g. the entry off of El
1-5
Council Agenda Report - ._Ppeal of Central Coast Mall Redevelopment Plans
(ARC 153 -98)
Page 6
Mercado into the Madonna Plaza). Such crossings can be designed to maximize safety and
appearance. The ARC has made quite an effort to assure that the crosswalk would be well done
and that buildings which front the roadway include varied design features and ample
landscaping. Again, this is perhaps not the perfect solution in comparison to what might be
possible with the unified redevelopment of both properties, but it is a reasonable one, given
current and foreseeable realities.
In conclusion, two things stand out: (1) Since Council goal setting two years ago, the City's
emphasis has been on assisting and expediting the redevelopment of the two existing centers, to
the end that the centers are fully utilized and of much greater benefit to the community and
shopping public; and (2) Since the City first started considering the redevelopment of the two
existing Madonna Road centers, and the development of the Dalidio property, the Council has
been insistent upon a maximum effort to functionally integrate the centers as much as possible to
reduce forcing people back into their cars to drive from one center to another.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt Draft Resolution B, upholding the appeal and directing the applicant to file an
application for the processing of a Planned Development amendment.
2. Continue with direction to the staff and appellant.
Attached:
1. - Draft Resolutions
2. - Appeal to City Council received 12 -16-98
3. - ARC approval letter dated 12 -9 -98
4.- 12 -7 -98 ARC minutes
5. - 11 -2 -98 & 12 -7 -98 ARC reports and attachments (including 11 -2 -98 ARC minutes)
6. - Chapter 17.62, Planned Development, of the zoning regulations
Enclosed:
Project plans
iLN
Draft Resolution "A"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION =S
ACTION, THEREBY UPHOLDING THE DECISION TO GRANT FINAL APPROVAL
TO THE CENTRAL. COAST MALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT
321 MADONNA ROAD (ARC 153 -98)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission conducted public hearings on
November 2, 1998, and December 7, 1998, to approve plans for the redevelopment of the Central
Coast Mall; and
WHEREAS, Brian Christensen, 818 Pismo Street, San Luis Obispo, filed an appeal of
the Architectural Review Commission's action on December 16, 1998, based on concerns with
the Community Development Director's interpretation that the project did not require the
processing of a separate application for a Planned Development Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on January 19, 1999, and has
considered testimony of interested parties including the appellant, the records of the
Architectural Review Commission's actions of November 2, 1998, and December 7, 1998, and
the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Negative Declaration with Mitigation
Measures (ER 153 -98) as approved by the Architectural Review Commission.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findin s. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed project
(ARC 153 -98), the appellant's statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following findings:
1 -7
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 2
1. The project, which is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the
same type of retail uses, is appropriate in this General Retail commercial setting, will be
compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the quality of life in San
Luis Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City's Architectural Review Guidelines.
2. The Community Development Director has determined that changes to the approved planned
development at the site could adequately be evaluated through review of plans by the
Architectural Review Commission.
3. The project which includes a proposed new boulevard between proposed building pads to
link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is consistent with Land Use
Element Policy 3.7. 10 encourages more cohesion between the existing shopping centers on
Madonna Road.
4. The project will add interest to the shopping center and help achieve goals to make the center
more pedestrian- friendly.
5. The use of compact parking spaces is supported in this project along the pedestrian walkways
through parking lots, because it provides for a reasonable use of the space given site
development constraints and project goals, and the number of compact spaces as a percentage
of overall parking spaces is minor (4.3 %).
6. Mitigation measures established for the project (ER 153 -98) have been reviewed and
adequately address potential impacts resulting from the redevelopment of a retail commercial
project on this site.
SECTION 2. Action - Appeal Denied. The appeal of the Architectural Review
Commission (ARC) is hereby denied. Therefore, the Commission's action to grant final
approval to the project is upheld, subject to the following conditions, mitigation measures and
code requirements:
1. Walkways along pedestrian linkages through the parking lot shall be a minimum of 4 feet in
width consistent with Title 24, Accessibility Code.
2. The adjacent 30' wide travel lane of the main access road through the shopping center in
front of buildings with "head -in" parking shall be delineated with street type striping to
improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away from the parked cats as
possible, to the approval of the Director of Public Works.
1-8
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 3
3. A total of 38 motorcycle spaces as shown on plans is approved to accommodate site
development as redeveloped.
4. Precise locations of required short-term bicycle spaces in racks near the entries to buildings
shall be to the approval of the Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and
Community Development Department (Planning) staffs.
5. The project shall provide long -tern bicycle spaces for all clusters of buildings, either in a
designated storage area in the building or in fully- enclosed lockers, to the approval of the
Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and Community Development
Department (Planning) staffs.
6. Prior to the removal of any trees along the Dalidio frontage between the back of the future
sidewalk and proposed buildings, the applicant shall submit adequate information for the
City Arborist to evaluate proposed tree removals. This information shall consist of cross -
sections, at those locations where plans indicate that the existing street trees cannot be saved,
showing existing and finished grades, as well as accurate base elevations and locations of the
existing trees.
7. The front elevation of Major Tenant "D" shall be further articulated as shown on revised
plans presented at the ARC meeting and dated 12 -7 -98. The ARC indicated that minor
changes to the elevations of major tenant spaces to show variations in the precise locations of
storefronts, display cases and textured wall surfaces to suit the needs of particular tenants,
may be made, subject to the approval of Planning staff, during building permit plan check.
8. When specific tenants are known, the applicant shall return to the ARC at a later date with a
comprehensive sign program.
9. The reuse of existing parking lot lights which are 38 feet in height was approved.
10. The street right -of -way line is 3 ft. behind the curb face along El Mercado. Interlocking
decorative pavers may be installed within El Mercado at the new driveway serving the
subject property. The decorative paving section shall be designed by the developer's
engineer, consistent with the City standard structural sections, and submitted for review and
approval by the Director of Public Works. The City will maintain this decorative paving
upon acceptance of the work.
11. Dalidio Dr. is currently a private St. southerly of the main Dalidio Dr. mall entrance near the
Post Office. The remainder is offered for public street purposes, but not yet accepted by the
City until completion of the street and additional right -of -way from the adjacent property
owner. An easement exists for the maintenance of the existing public water main and public
utilities. Standard 6 ft. sidewalk shall be constructed along this frontage with the project,
unless a postponement or waiver is approved by the Public Works Director as a result of an
1 -9
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 4
approved realignment of Dalidio Dr. in conjunction with the proposed "Market Place"
project.
12. Street trees along El Mercado and Dalidio Dr. (Prado Rd) frontages shall meet City standards
as to size and species to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, with consideration for existing
utilities.
13. The existing flood zone must be plotted on the plans as denoted on the grading plan for the
existing plaza. Satellite building pads #6 and Major E may need to be raised above the 100 -
yr storm water surface elevation.
14. There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly driveways)
that serve the existing mall development. Drainage from the modified parking lot, driveways
and buildings must conform to the existing pattern or modified as needed, to the satisfaction
of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Any proposed changes
must consider any resulting changes in the 100 -year floodplain. (See 5. above)
Mitigation Measures
1. Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety Element, a detailed
soils engineering report needs to be submitted at the time of building permit which considers
special grading and construction techniques necessary to address the potential for
liquefaction and issues associated with expansive soils. It shall identify the soil profile on site
and provide site preparation recommendations to ensure against unstable soil conditions.
Grading and building must be designed and performed in compliance with the soils
engineering report.
2. The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing shopping center shall be
plotted on working drawings submitted for a building permit for the redevelopment project.
The finish floor of any affected project buildings shall be raised to a minimum of one foot
above the 100 -year storm water surface elevation consistent with the City's Flood Damage
Prevention Regulations.
3. The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site during the lunch hour;
• extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from
automobiles.
4. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land Use Plan, the
property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of
San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport
via an avigation easement document available at the Community Development Department.
1 -10
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 5
5. Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into the project
landscaping plan. Where proposed plans do not allow for the retention of existing trees, the
applicant shall incorporate new trees into the landscaping plan to compensate for trees removed
to the approval of the Architectural Review Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees are proposed to be removed. The developer shall prepare
a plan to the satisfaction of the City Arborist that provides for the replanting of a sufficient
number of existing specimens to nearby Laguna Lake Park. Removal shall be accomplished
using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory work under the direct supervision of a
certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated to an area at Laguna Lake Park designated by
the City Arborist and the site shall be prepared to receive said trees as directed by the City
Arborist. Trees not replanted shall be replaced with number, size, and species satisfactory to
the City Arborist.
6. Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation.
• Energy -efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
7. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
a. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for interior and exterior on -site
recycling.
b. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling
discarded materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction
site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or
the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance.
c. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and decorative building
components and in surfacing wherever feasible.
8. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or
cultural materials, then construction activities which may affect them shall cease until the
extent of the resource is determined and appropriate protective measures are approved by the
Community Development Director. The Community Development Director shall be notified
of the extent and location of discovered materials so that they may be recorded by a qualified
archaeologist.
9. If pre - historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor should
be called in to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of
artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws.
1 -11
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page 6
Code Requirements
1. A water allocation may be required, due to the additional units. Currently, a water allocation
can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City's Water Conservation
division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits.
2. If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized, Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an allocation through
retrofit could offset a portion of the required Water Impact Fee according to appropriate City
policies. The project will receive a credit for any water meters that are no longer needed and
are subsequently removed.
3. The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the City can
make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure. If it is discovered
that an off -site deficiency exists, the owner will be required to mitigate the deficiency as a
part of the overall project. It is already known that the Laguna Lift Station is beyond
capacity. However, the City expects to have a replacement lift station with adequate capacity
constructed by 2001.
4. Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oil/sand separators or other
wastewater pre- treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste
Coordinator.
5. All existing fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire hydrant systems, fire protection
systems and appliances shall be modified to address the requirements of proposed
occupancies.
6. Where minimum required fire access width is provided, curbs shall be painted red with
appropriate signage installed to prohibit parking.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 19' day of January, 1999.
1 -12
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page: 7.
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price,
APPROVED:
i Alt/to y J ey Jorgensen
1 -13
Draft Resolution `B"
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDNG AN APPEAL OF THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION'S
ACTION, THEREBY REQUIRING THE APPLICANT FOR THE
CENTRAL COAST MALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT
321 MADONNA ROAD (ARC 153 -98) TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR
A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDEMENT
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission conducted public hearings on
November 2, 1998, and December 7, 1998, to approve plans for the redevelopment of the Central
Coast Mall; and
WHEREAS, Brian Christensen, 818 Pismo Street, San Luis Obispo, filed an appeal of
the Architectural Review Commission's action on December 16, 1998, based on concerns with
the Community Development Director's interpretation that the project did not require the
processing of a separate application for a Planned Development Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on January 19, 1999, and has
considered testimony of interested parties including the appellant, the records of the
Architectural Review Commission's actions of November 2, 1998, and December 7, 1998, and
the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Negative Declaration with Mitigation
Measures (ER 153 -98) as approved by the Architectural Review Commission.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed project
(ARC 153 -98), the appellant's statement, staff recommendations and reports thereof, makes the
following finding:
1 -14
Resolution No. (1999 :>..Aes)
Page 2
1. The City Council has determined that changes to the approved planned development at the
site need to be processed through a Planned Development Amendment.
SECTION 2. Action. The appeal is hereby upheld, and the applicant is directed to file an
application with the Community Development Department for a Planned Development
Amendment.
On motion of
AYES:
NOES:
e 51►r
seconded by
, and on the following roll call vote:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 19'x' day of January, 1999.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED:
fl7fttt e:ffr G. Jorgensen
1 -15
�a��ii����1n������II�N�� ►������� IIIII C.ty'of sAn hos OBISPO
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 heQdeecision of
rendered on
which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for submitting the a p addition I sh ets as need d.)
qqy�`�. -v mss.. �
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
on
Name/Department'' (Date)
Appellant: C �r S'E�1, uZ\S l�
Name/Title Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative:
Name/Title
For Official Use Only:
Calendared for iR. /g4og
c: City Attorney
City Administrative Officer
` /C Oy to the following department(s):
V f Win,. /v�' i0-� e
Original in City Clerk's Office
Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
ATTACHMENT 2
Date & Time Received:
"-c 1 6 1998
SLOLEF
1 -16
Isis
December 9, 1998
City Of SAn Luis OBISPO
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 -3249
R.R.M. Design Group
Pat Blote
3701 south Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC and ER 153-98 - 321 Madonna Road
Environmental and architectural review of plans to redevelop an
existing mall by replacing 150,000 square feet of existing retail
space, and other site modifications.
Dear Mr. Blote:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of December 7, 1998, approved
the Negative Declaration and granted final approval to your project based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions, mitigation measures and code
requirements:
Findings
1. The project, which is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site
with the same type of retail uses, is appropriate in this General Retail commercial
setting, will be compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the
quality of life in San Luis Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City's
Architectural Review Guidelines.
2. The Community Development Director has determined that changes to the
approved planned development at the site could adequately be evaluated through
review of plans by the Architectural Review Commission.
3. The project which includes a proposed new boulevard between proposed building
pads to link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is consistent with
Land Use Element Policy 3.7.10 encourages more cohesion between the existing
shopping centers on Madonna Road.
4. The project will add interest to the shopping center and help achieve goals to make
the center more pedestrian- friendly.
1 -17
OTrie Cit of Sa ,programs and activities.
lelecomm ATTACHMENT -3 .nic;
ARC and ER 153-98
Page 2
5. The use of compact parking spaces is supported in this project along the pedestrian
walkways through parking lots, because it provides for a reasonable use of the
space given site development constraints and project goals, and the number of
compact spaces as a percentage of overall parking spaces is minor (4.3 %).
6. Mitigation measures established for the project (ER 153 -98) have been reviewed
and adequately address potential impacts resulting from the redevelopment of a
retail commercial project on this site.
Conditions
1. Walkways along pedestrian linkages through the parking lot shall be a minimum of 4
feet in width consistent with Title 24, Accessibility Code.
2. The adjacent 30' wide travel lane of the main access road through the shopping
center in front of buildings with "head -in" parking shall be delineated with street type
striping to improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away
from the parked cars as possible, to the approval of the Director of Public Works.
3. A total of 38 motorcycle spaces as shown on plans is approved to accommodate
site development as redeveloped.
4. Precise locations of required short-term bicycle spaces in racks near the entries to
buildings shall be to the approval of the Public Works Department (Transportation
Division) and Community Development Department (Planning) staffs.
5. The project shall provide long-term bicycle spaces for all clusters of buildings, either
in a designated storage area in the building or in fully- enclosed lockers, to the
approval of the Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and Community
Development Department (Planning) staffs.
6. Prior to the removal of any trees along the Dalidio frontage between the back of the
future sidewalk and proposed buildings, the applicant shall submit adequate
information for the City Arborist to evaluate proposed tree removals. This
information shall consist of cross - sections, at those locations where plans indicate
that the existing street trees cannot be saved, showing existing and finished grades,
as well as accurate base elevations and locations of the existing trees.
7. The front elevation of Major Tenant "D" shall be further articulated as shown on
revised plans presented at the ARC meeting and dated 12 -7 -98. The ARC indicated
that minor changes to the elevations of major tenant spaces to show variations in
the precise locations of storefronts, display cases and textured wall surfaces to suit
the needs of particular tenants, may be made, subject to the approval of Planning
staff, during building permit plan check.
1 -18
ARC and ER 153-98
Page 3
8. When specific tenants are known, the applicant shall return to the ARC at a later
date with a comprehensive sign program.
9. The reuse of existing parking lot lights which are 38 feet in height was approved.
10.The street right -of -way line is 3 ft. behind the curb face along El Mercado.
Interlocking decorative pavers may be installed within El Mercado at the new
driveway serving the subject property. The decorative paving section shall be
designed by the developer's engineer, consistent with the City standard structural
sections, and submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public Works.
The City will maintain this decorative paving upon acceptance of the work.
11. Dalidio Dr. is currently a private St. southerly of the main Dalidio Dr. mall entrance
near the Post Office. The remainder is offered for public street purposes, but not yet
accepted by the City until completion of the: street and additional right -of -way from
the adjacent property owner. An easement exists for the maintenance of the
existing public water main and public utilities. Standard 6 ft. sidewalk shall be
constructed along this frontage with the project, unless a postponement or waiver is
approved by the Public Works Director as a result of an approved realignment of
Dalidio Dr. in conjunction with the proposed "Market Place" project.
12. Street trees along El Mercado and Dalidio Dr. (Prado Rd) frontages shall meet City
standards as to size and species to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, with
consideration for existing utilities.
13.The existing flood zone must be plotted on the plans as denoted on the grading plan
for the existing plaza. Satellite building pads #6 and Major E may need to be raised
above the 100 -yr storm water surface elevation.
14. There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly
driveways) that serve the existing mall development. Drainage from the modified
parking lot, driveways and buildings must conform to the existing pattern or modified
as needed, to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development
Departments. Any proposed changes must consider any resulting changes in the
100 -year floodplain. (See 5. above)
Mitigation Measures
Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety Element, a
detailed soils engineering report needs to be submitted at the time of building
permit which considers special grading and construction techniques necessary to
address the potential for liquefaction and issues associated with expansive soils. It
shall identify the soil profile on site and provide site preparation recommendations to
ensure against unstable soil conditions. Grading and building must be designed
and performed in compliance with the soils engineering report.
1 -19
ARC and ER 153-98
Page 4
2. The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing shopping center
shall be plotted on working drawings submitted for a building permit for the
redevelopment project The finish floor of any affected project buildings shall be
raised to a minimum of one foot above the 100 -year storm water surface elevation
consistent with the City's Flood Damage Prevention Regulations.
3. The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site during the
lunch hour,
• extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions
from automobiles.
4. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land Use Plan,
the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection
of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis
Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document available at the
Community Development Department.
5. Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into the
project landscaping plan. Where proposed plans do not allow for the retention of
existing trees, the applicant shall incorporate new trees into the landscaping plan to
compensate for trees removed to the approval of the Architectural Review
Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees are proposed to be removed. The developer
shall prepare a plan to the satisfaction of the City Arborist that provides for the
replanting of a sufficient number of existing specimens to nearby Laguna Lake Park.
Removal shall be accomplished using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory
work under the direct supervision of a certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated
to an area at Laguna Lake Park designated by the City Arborist and the site shall be
prepared to receive said trees as directed by the City Arborist. Trees not replanted
shall be replaced with number, size, and species satisfactory to the City Arborist.
6. Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation.
• Energy - efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
7. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
a. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for interior and exterior
on -site recycling.
1 -20
ARC and ER 153 -98
Page 5
b. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling plan for
recycling discarded materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals,
from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's
Solid Waste Coordinator or the Community Development Director, prior to
building permit issuance.
c. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and decorative building
components and in surfacing wherever feasible.
8. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological
resources or cultural materials, then construction activities which may affect them
shall cease until the extent of the resource is determined and appropriate protective
measures are approved by the Community Development Director. The Community
Development Director shall be notified of the extent and location of discovered
materials so that they may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist.
9. If pre - historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor
should be called in to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the
items. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws.
Code Reauirements
1. A water allocation may be required, due to the additional units. Currently, a water
allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City's Water
Conservation division can help in determining the needed allocation and the
necessary number of retrofits.
2. If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized,
Water and Wastewater Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an
allocation through retrofit could offset a portion of the required Water Impact Fee
according to appropriate City policies. The project will receive a credit for any water
meters that are no longer needed and are subsequently removed.
3. The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the
City can make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure.
If it is discovered that an off -site deficiency exists, the owner will be required to
mitigate the deficiency as a part of the overall project. It is already known that the
Laguna Lift Station is beyond capacity. However, the City expects to have a
replacement lift station with adequate capacity constructed by 2001.
4. Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oillsand separators or
other wastewater pre - treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial
Waste Coordinator.
1 -21
ARC and ER 153-98
Page 6
5. All existing fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire hydrant systems, fire
protection systems and appliances shall be modified to address the requirements of
proposed occupancies.
6. Where minimum required fire access width is provided, curbs shall be painted red
with appropriate signage installed to prohibit parking.
The decision of the Commission is final unless appealed to the City Council within ten
days of the action.
While the City's water allocation regulations are in effect, the Architectural Review
Commission's approval expires after three years if construction has not started, unless
the Commission designated a different time period. On request, the Community
Development Director may grant a single one -year extension.
If you have questions, please contact Pam Ricci at (805) 781 -7168.
Sincerely,
Rp aid Whise nd
Development Review Manager
cc: MBK Southern California Ltd.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 1040
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Mutual Life Insurance Co. of N.Y.
clo Mony /Central Coast mall
Attn: Yvonne Carrasco
321 Madonna Road, Suite 200
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
1 -22
J
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 3
5. The signs for which the exceptions are requested are consistent with the purpose and intent
of the sign regulations.
Conditions:
1. The bases of the proposed directional signs shall be buried 6 inches into the ground when
installed so that there total height does not exceed 3 feet, consistent with the height
requirements for such signs contained in the sign regulations.
2. The total number of wall signs shall not exceed four, and the total area of these signs shall
not exceed 219 square feet. The "Parts & Service" sign shall not exceed 36 square feet in
overall sign area.
3. With installation of new signs, any remaining existing signs shall be removed.
4. Future additional signs shall not exceed the maximum limits set out by this approval without
the review and approval of the Architectural Review Commission.
Code Requirement:
1. A sign permit needs to be obtained for all approved signs prior to their installation.
Commr. Parker seconded the motion.
AYES: Aiken, Mingworth, Parker, Rawson, Regier, Stevenson
NOES: Loh
ABSENT: None
The motion passed (6-1).
2. ARC 153 -98 321 Madonna Road: Environmental and architectural review of plans to
redevelop an existing mall by replacing 150,000 square feet of existing retail space, and
other site modifications; C -R -PD zone; R.R.M. Design Group, applicant.
Pam Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and final approval of the project, based on findings, and
with conditions, mitigation measures and code requirements.
ATTACHMENT 4 1 -23
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 4
APPLICANT /ARCHITECT:
Andy Trackman, MBK, mentioned that they had met with staff to gauge if revised plans were in
compliance with the ARC's direction. He explained that some changes were not possible
because of site constraints.
Pat Blote reviewed the applicant's response to eliminating compact spaces in the parking lots; he
indicated that is was not possible to do so without significant changes in both the number and
layout of spaces. He noted that buildings would be set back a total of 24 feet from current
alignment of Dalidio and would be set back even farther from a future alignment. He explained
that the building elevations had been revised to provide a greater differentiation in architectural
style and detailing and variety in colors. He indicated that the front elevations of major tenant
buildings had been modified to be more pedestrian friendly. He requested approval of the
architectural elements shown, but wanted to have some flexibility to make future changes based
on individual tenants (choices of requested storefronts, display cabinets or architectural insets).
He described the gateway feature.
Vic Montgomery explained concern with relocating gateway in the future with realignment of
Dalidio.
OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT:
There was no public comment.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Aiken asked Pat Blote if all tree removals including those along Dalidio, were still
proposed.
Pat Blote responded that it was their intention to remove all trees.
Commr. Stevenson expressed concerns with the wholesale redevelopment of the parking lot and
proposed tree removals. He questioned whether the proposed alignment of the planned
boulevard was absolutely necessary. He noted that they could possibly shift the location of the
boulevard and save more trees.
Commr. Aiken indicated the need to be comfortable with the proposed tree removals since the
project will no doubt receive public scrutiny.
Commr. Regier asked about reviewing the site plan to eliminate the use of compact spaces.
Pat Blote responded that it had been examined, but that the only change to plans with these
1 -24
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 5
spaces was to correct the dimension for car overhang from 24" to 30 ".
The ARC asked about the retention of existing mall tenants. Andy Trachman did not provide
specific names, but indicated that there were ongoing negotiations with some tenants.
Commr. Illingworth stated that he liked changes and felt that they really responded to ARC
direction. He noted that he could support the use of compact spaces.
Comm r. Rawson indicated that he supported revisions.
Commr. Parker stated he loved the colors and the geometric detailing. He also mentioned that he
liked the entrance/gateway feature. He noted that he appreciated the windows adjacent to the
main entrances.
Commr. Regier stated that he agreed with the previous comments. He indicated that he
supported head -in parking, and grudgingly the use of compact spaces.
Commr. Stevenson indicated his support of the revised design. He stated that he is discouraged
that the project is not more pedestrian- oriented and better connected to other sites. He noted that
there will be a reaction to the loss of trees. He indicated that he would like to see some attempt
to retain some of the trees in good shape.
Commr. Loh stated that she is pleased with the changes including the change to eliminate the two
parking spaces that raised safety concerns. She supported the 90° angle parking. She noted that
she would like to see the Arborist review all tree removals. She indicated the 18 -foot setback is
OK along Dalidio. She also strongly supported the gateway feature.
Vic Montgomery wanted to reiterate the understanding that there would be future flexibility with
the locations of store- fronts and display windows.
Commr. Loh moved to approve the ARC Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and
granted final approval of the project, based on the following findings, and subject to the
following conditions, mitigation measures and code requirements:
Findines
1. The project, which is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the
same type of retail uses, is appropriate in this General Retail commercial setting, will be
compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the quality of life in San
Luis Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City's Architectural Review Guidelines.
2. The Community Development Director has determined that changes to the approved planned
development at the site could adequately be evaluated through review of plans by the
1 -25
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 6
Architectural Review Commission.
3. The project which includes a proposed new boulevard between proposed building pads to
link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is consistent with Land Use
Element Policy 3.7. 10 encourages more cohesion between the existing shopping centers on
Madonna Road.
4. The project will add interest to the shopping center and help achieve goals to make the center
more pedestrian - friendly.
5. The use of compact parking spaces is supported in this project along the pedestrian walkways
through parking lots, because it provides for a reasonable use of the space given site
development constraints and project goals, and the number of compact spaces as a percentage
of overall parking spaces is minor (4.3 %).
6. Mitigation measures established for the project (ER 153 -98) have been reviewed and
adequately address potential impacts resulting from the redevelopment of a retail commercial
project on this site.
Conditions
1. Walkways along pedestrian linkages through the parking lot shall be a minimum of 4 feet in
width consistent with Title 24, Accessibility Code.
2. The adjacent 30' wide travel lane of the main access road through the shopping center in
front of buildings with "head -in" parking shall be delineated with street type striping to
improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away from the parked cars as
possible, to the approval of the Director of Public Works.
3. A total of 38 motorcycle spaces as shown on plans is approved to accommodate site
development as redeveloped.
4. Precise locations of required short-tern bicycle spaces in racks near the entries to buildings
shall be to the approval of the Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and
Community Development Department (Planning) staffs.
5. The project shall provide long -term bicycle spaces for all clusters of buildings, either in a
designated storage area in the building or in fully - enclosed lockers, to the approval of the
Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and Community Development
Department (Planning) staffs.
6. Prior to the removal of any trees along the Dalidio frontage between the back of the future
sidewalk and proposed buildings, the applicant shall submit adequate information for the
1 -26
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 7
City Arborist to evaluate proposed tree removals. This information shall consist of cross -
sections, at those locations where plans indicate that the existing street trees cannot be saved,
showing existing and finished grades, as well as accurate base elevations and locations of the
existing trees.
7. The front elevation of Major Tenant "D" shall be further articulated as shown on revised
plans presented at the ARC meeting and dated 12 -7 -98. The ARC indicated that minor
changes to the elevations of major tenant spaces to show variations in the precise locations of
storefronts, display cases and textured wall surfaces to suit the needs of particular tenants,
may be made, subject to the approval of Planning staff, during building permit plan check.
8. When specific tenants are known, the applicant shall return to the ARC at a later date with a
comprehensive sign program.
9. The reuse of existing parking lot lights which are 38 feet in height was approved.
10. The street right -of -way line is 3 ft. behind the curb face along El Mercado. Interlocking
decorative pavers may be installed within El Mercado at the new driveway serving the
subject property. The decorative paving section shall be designed by the developer's
engineer, consistent with the City standard structural sections, and submitted for review and
approval by the Director of Public Works. The City will maintain this decorative paving
upon acceptance of the work.
11. Dalidio Dr. is currently a private St. southerly of the main Dalidio Dr. mall entrance near the
Post Office. The remainder is offered for public street purposes, but not yet accepted by the
City until completion of the street and additional right -of -way from the adjacent property
owner. An easement exists for the maintenance of the existing public water main and public
utilities. Standard 6 ft. sidewalk shall be constructed along this frontage with the project,
unless a postponement or waiver is approved by the Public Works Director as a result of an
approved realignment of Dalidio Dr. in conjunction with the proposed "Market Place"
project.
12. Street trees along El Mercado and Dalidio Dr. (Prado Rd) frontages shall meet City standards
as to size and species to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, with consideration for existing
utilities.
13. The existing flood zone must be plotted on the plans as denoted on the grading plan for the
existing plaza. Satellite building pads #6 and Major E may need to be raised above the 100 -
yr storm water surface elevation.
14. There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly driveways)
that serve the existing mall development. Drainage from the modified parking lot, driveways
and buildings must conform to the existing pattern or modified as needed, to the satisfaction
1 -27
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 8
of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Any proposed changes
must consider any resulting changes in the 100 -year floodplain. (See 5. above)
Mitigation Measures
1. Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety Element, a detailed
soils engineering report needs to be submitted at the time of building permit which considers
special grading and construction techniques necessary to address the potential for
liquefaction and issues associated with expansive soils. It shall identify the soil profile on site
and provide site preparation recommendations to ensure against unstable soil conditions.
Cording and building must be designed and performed in compliance with the soils
engineering report.
2. The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing shopping center shall be
plotted on working drawings submitted for a building permit for the redevelopment project.
The finish floor of any affected project buildings shall be raised to a minimum of one foot
above the 100 -year storm water surface elevation consistent with the City's Flood Damage
Prevention Regulations.
3. The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site during the lunch hour,
• extensive tree planting in the parking area to help reduce evaporative emissions from
automobiles.
4. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land Use Plan, the
property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of
San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport
via an avigation easement document available at the Community Development Department
5. Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into the project
landscaping plan. Where proposed plans do not allow for the retention of existing trees, the
applicant shall incorporate new trees into the landscaping plan to compensate for trees removed
to the approval of the Architectural Review Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees are proposed to be removed. The developer shall prepare
a plan to the satisfaction of the City Arborist that provides for the replanting of a sufficient
number of existing specimens to nearby Laguna Lake Park. Removal shall be accomplished
using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory work under the direct supervision of a
certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated to an area at Laguna Lake Park designated by
the City Arborist and the site shall be prepared to receive said trees as directed by the City
Arborist Trees not replanted shall be replaced with number, size, and species satisfactory to
1 -28
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 9
the City Arborist.
6. Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation.
• Energy - efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
7. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
a. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for interior and exterior on -site
recycling.
b. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling
discarded materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction
site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or
the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance.
c. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and decorative building
components and in surfacing wherever feasible.
8. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or
cultural materials, then construction activities which may affect them shall cease until the
extent of the resource is determined and appropriate protective measures are approved by the
Community Development Director. The Community Development Director shall be notified
of the extent and location of discovered materials so that they may be recorded by a qualified
archaeologist.
9. If pre - historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor should
be called in to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of
artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws.
Code Requirements
1. A water allocation may be required, due to the additional units. Currently, a water allocation
can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City's Water Conservation
division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits.
2. If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized, Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an allocation through
retrofit could offset a portion of the required Water Impact Fee according to appropriate City
policics. The project will receive a credit for any water meters that are no longer needed and
are subsequently removed.
1 -29
ARC Minutes
December 7, 1998
Page 10
3. The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the City can
make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure. If it is discovered
that an off -site deficiency exists, the owner will be required to mitigate the deficiency as a
part of the overall project. It is already known that the Laguna Lift Station is beyond
capacity. However, the City expects to have a replacement lift station with adequate capacity
constructed by 2001.
4. Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oil/sand separators or other
wastewater pre- treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste
Coordinator.
5. All existing fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire hydrant systems, fire protection
systems and appliances shall be modified to address the requirements of proposed
occupancies.
6. Where minimum required fire access width is provided, curbs shall be painted red with
appropriate signage installed to prohibit parking.
Comm. Illineworth seconded the motion.
AYES: Aiken, Mingworth, Loh, Parker, Rawson, Regier
NOES: Stevenson
ABSENT: None
The motion passed (6-1).
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
Pam Ricci, Associate Planner distributed a memo from John Mandeville on the upcoming urban
design workshop for the Airport area and provided an agenda forecast. She also mentioned that
the applicant for the San Luis Marketplace was interested in coming before the Arc for a
conceptual review in the near future.
Alice Loh noted that she would not be attending the 12 -21 -98 meeting and Jim Aiken added that
there was a possibility that he would not be there. The ARC asked staff to present an update at
their next meeting on the recruitment for a new commissioner to replace the retiring Ron Regier.
Lance Parker asked that packets not be printed on bright and dark colors so that they would be
more legible and easier to copy if necessary.
The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. to a regular meeting of the Architectural Review
Commission scheduled for Monday, December 21, 1998 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing
Room, City Hall, 990 Palm Street.
1-30
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM # 2
BY: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner P9 MEETING DATE: November 2, 1998
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review ManagerC "
FILE NUMBER: ARC 153 -98
PROJECT ADDRESS: 321 Madonna Road
SUBJECT: Review of plans to redevelop the existing Central Coast Mall located on the
southeast side of Madonna Road and west of Highway 101.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Provide comments on the Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and grant schematic
approval to the project, with direction on items to return to the Commission with final
architectural review of plans.
BACKGROUND:
Situation
The applicant has filed plans for environmental review and architectural review to redevelop the
existing Central Coast Mall site. The four outlying pad buildings nearest Madonna Road,
Gottschalks and the hotel would be retained. The central portion of the mall would be
demolished and replaced with new construction to accommodate an expansion to Gottschalks,
three larger tenants (23,625 sq.ft: 30,000 sq.ft.) and smaller shops (total of 5,000 sq.ft.). A
pedestrian and automobile boulevard is proposed between these new central buildings to connect
the site with the adjacent Madonna Road Plaza Shopping Center and ultimately with the planned
Marketplace project on the Dalidio property. Three outlying pads are also proposed with varying
building sizes. The total square footage of the redeveloped site would be 255,497 sq.ft. (258,100
sq.ft. currently exist). The applicant is requesting final approval of project plans by the ARC.
Data Summary
Address: 321 Madonna Road
Applicant: MBK Southern California Ltd.
Representative: RRM Design Group
Zoning: C -R -PD (Retail Commercial with the Planned Development overlay)
General Plan: General Retail
Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration of environmental impact was
recommended by the Development Review Manager on October 12, 1998.
Project Action Deadline: January 8, 1999
ATTACHMENT 5 1 -31
ARC 153 -98
Page 2
Site Description
The project site includes approximately 24 acres and is developed with an approximately
230,000 sq.ft. enclosed mall, four freestanding pad buildings and parking lot areas with
landscaping. The site is surrounded by Highway 101, Madonna Road, the Madonna Plaza
Shopping Center and the undeveloped Dalidio property.
EVALUATION
Back in 1984 when plans for the Central Coast Mall were being reviewed by the City, many in
the community were concerned that the development would have dire impacts on the economic
vitality of the downtown. Despite these concerns, the mall project was approved by the City
through a "PD ", planned development zoning. With the PD, conditions were imposed on the
project including types of uses, required parking, public improvements and lighting (see attached
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 Series)). Because of the PD, a development plan was approved by the
Planning Commission and City Council, in addition to approval of plans by the Architectural
Review Commission.
After its completion in 1987, spaces in the mall were mostly leased out for the next several years.
However, over the last five years, the opposite has been true and most of the mall space is
currently vacant. The applicant is now proposing to revitalize the mall by keeping the successful
components of the current project, and replacing the bulk of the interior mall space with new
separate pad buildings. The applicant in an attached project description indicates that the
objective of the new pad buildings is to attract larger tenants that desire separate identity and
parking accessibility.
The following paragraphs discuss components of the project in greater detail and evaluate the
design of the reconfigured retail development:
1. Consistency with the General Plan & Zoning
The project is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the same type of
retail uses. Portions of existing buildings would be demolished and replaced with new
construction. The reconfigured project will result in a slight net loss of retail floor area, about
2,000 square feet less than currently exists. The Community Development Director determined
that changes to the approved planned development at the site could adequately be evaluated
through review of plans by the Architectural Review Commission.
The project does not involve any changes in zoning that would potentially raise policy
consistency issues. The attached initial study mentions that the proposed new boulevard between
proposed building pads, to link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is
consistent with Land Use Element Policy 3.7. 10 encourages more cohesion between the existing
shopping centers on Madonna Road.
1 -32
ARC 153 -98
Page 3
2. Parldns
Plans indicate that the same parking ratio as currently exists, one parking space for each 258
square feet of retail floor area, will be maintained with site redevelopment. With review of the
project to this date, the number of parking spaces has not been an issue. However, the
applicant's proposal to reconfigure the entire parking lot east of the north -south running
driveway between Taco Bell and Gottschalks has raised several concerns.
The most significant concern is the removal of 302 trees to accommodate the reconfigured
parking lot. This issue is discussed in more detail in the next section of this report. Other
concerns brought up with proposed site changes include:
• Compact Spaces
A majority of the parking spaces to be provided will be "average" size spaces consistent with the
City's Parking & Driveway Standards. The exception to this is the 56 parking spaces on either
side of two pedestrian pathways through the parking lot that run between central major tenants
and new outlying pads near Dalidio Drive.
The use of compact spaces in City parking lots is discouraged as vehicles of inappropriate size
often attempt to use them when other spaces are full or if the compact space is closer to the driver's
ultimate destination. The City's Parking & Driveway Standards state that "compact spaces are
allowed only if justified by unusual circumstances such as saving a tree or using otherwise
unusable space-"
The Commission should decide if the use of compact spaces in this parking lot is appropriate. A
rationale for allowing the limited use of compact spaces in the project might be that such a
relatively small percentage of overall spaces will be compact, 56 of 1,301 total spaces, or 4.3 %.
• Tree Wells
Another requirement from the City's Parking & Driveway Standards says;
In order to encourage the use of trees in parking lot areas, planters shall be
placed after each six parking spaces in any row, and at the ends of each row of
parking spaces. (Parking & Driveway Standards I.1.)
In the past, this requirement was most typically met with "finger" type planters a minimum of
four feet wide. However, with some more recently approved projects for larger -scale parking
lots, including the Marigold Shopping Center and the rear parking lot at French Hospital, smaller
tree well planters have been approved.
There are advantages and disadvantages to the use of tree wells. The obvious disadvantages are
that they are more limited in size and do not allow for the range of plant materials that larger
finger planters can accommodate. On the positive side, it can be argued that the tree wells allow
1 -33
ARC 153 -98
Page 4
for a greater number of trees in parking areas with better canopy coverage. Because of their
placement and confined size, the vegetation in tree wells is not as readily trampled by pedestrians
using planters as short-cuts through parking lots.
Staff had previously suggested to the applicant that they look at the possibility of alternating
"finger" style planters with tree wells as a compromise. The ARC should make a determination
regarding the use of the diamond - shaped tree wells included in plans.
• Parking Spaces along Main Project Access
The proposed parking spaces directly in front of new central mid -boxes directly conflict with the
flow of traffic down the main access road through the shopping center in front of buildings. The
attached memo from Bob Bishop, Site Grading representative from the Community
Development Department, also notes the potential for conflicts with the creation of these spaces.
Staff has suggested to the applicant that these spaces be eliminated, but the applicant feels
strongly that these spaces are necessary to the success of the types of clients that they are trying
to attract.
In lieu of complete elimination, staff recommends that the number of these spaces be minimized
with consideration given to time- monitoring to accommodate loading and unloading activities.
Another possibility may be to allow accessible spaces along with a few loading spaces with time
limitations here.
• Bicycle & Motorcycle Parking
The attached memo from Terry Sanville of the Public Works Department notes that bike racks
should be relocated from some proposed locations and added at others in numbers that are in
compliance with the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. His memo also specifies that lockers
need to be provided for all clusters of buildings. Motorcycle spaces are well disbursed through
the parking lots, but appear to fall short of the required ratio of one motorcycle space for each 20
automobile spaces. Project statistics should be amended to list numbers of required and provided
bicycle and motorcycle spaces, as well as plans updated to show locations and details of racks
and lockers.
3. Tree Removals
The total redevelopment of the central parking lot will result in the removal of many mature and
attractive trees. A plan has been submitted which shows the general outline of existing vegetation
in relationship to the proposed reconfigured layout. Virtually every tree in the area of the
redeveloped parking lot, a total of 302 trees, will be removed. As noted in the attached initial
study, the removal of these trees will change the number and diversity of plant species on the site.
The City Arborist has reviewed project plans and does not object to removal of the bulk of
proposed tree removals which include oaks, Monterey & Bishop pines, London Planes and
Myoporums. He has indicated that some of the existing London Plane (Platanus acerifolia) trees
1 -34
ARC 153 -98
Page 5
are not particularly healthy and may be removed without specific mitigation. However, the Coast
Live Oak trees are considered more significanttree specimens.
Mitigation Measure No. 5 includes a requirementthat several existing Coast Live Oak trees maybe
removed with the condition that they are replanted at nearby Laguna Lake Park. In its
consideration of project tree removals, the City's Tree Committee heard from the applicant that a
$20,000 budget had been set aside for the replanting of the oaks. The Tree Committee on a 3 -1
vote ultimately supported proposed tree removals with the noted mitigation for the oaks.
Addition of 336 trees on the site as indicated on the project landscaping plan will help compensate
for the loss of trees proposed to be removed. However, Planning staff continues to question the
need to remove as many trees as are proposed. For this reason, Mitigation Measure No. 5 also
includes language that existing mature trees be retained and incorporated into the project
landscaping plan where feasible. In staffs view, with the loss of some parking spaces, it may be
possible to retain more of the existing parking configuration, as well as accommodate the new
boulevard.
4. Building Design
As noted on Page 3 of the applicant's project description, the strategy with the design for new
buildings has been to utilize predominant shapes and scale found in the existing project, but to
also incorporate some variation through new accent materials (brick veneer), architectural
features (towers) and color palettes. The predominant exterior material is stucco which will be
used for walls, columns, parapets and bases. Roofing will be the same concrete flat tiles used on
the existing buildings. A colors and materials board has not been submitted yet, but will be
available for ARC review at the meeting.
Staff has met with the applicant several times to discuss the project including architecture. In
response to a concern of staff that new buildings seemed to be turning their backs on the new
boulevard, the applicant modified plans to show the comer spaces with angled storefronts. In
staff's opinion, the alley and parking lot views of the new central tenant spaces are the most
interesting in the project because of tower elements, arched forms, arbors and awnings. The
"alley" (boulevard) views of buildings could be enlivened by the addition of storefronts or
display cases in arched forms of walls.
Staff suggests that the ARC focus their discussion on further techniques to reduce the apparent
mass of buildings, proposals for screening loading, and ways to improve the appearance of less
prominent elevations. Staff is also concerned that Pads 5 & 6 and Major E are only set back
about 10 feet from Dalidio Drive. Since this may become a major arterial in the future, a more
substantial setback of 15' -30' to allow for very dense planting may be advisable. This may also
be a way to preserve additional trees on the site. The appearance of the rear walls of outlying
buildings should also be included in plans to verify that they are adequately articulated.
1 -35
ARC 153 -98
Page 6
5. Other Details
In terms of lighting, Sheet No. 12 shows illustrations of how various existing lighting would be
reused in the project. A sheet is attached to this report which provides information on fixture
types, lighting levels and heights of different types of lighting. Staff's main concern with the
review of this information is that the existing parking lot lights are 38 feet in height. The City's
current standard for lighting fixtures in commercial parking lots is a maximum of 20 feet in
height. The taller lights allow the applicant to use fewer standards because of their greater
coverage. The ARC should determine whether the existing 38 -foot high standards should be
allowed in this parking lot given its more outlying location and previous approvals for taller
standards.
The applicant has shown generalized information on signage, but has indicated that a formal sign
program would return to the ARC at a later date.
Conclusion
While staff commends the applicant on their efforts to revitalize the mall, the preceding sections
of the staff report have identified a number of key issues that the ARC needs to focus their
discussion on in order to provide direction to the applicant and staff prior to final approval of the
project. There are some very appealing components of the project including the landscaping
treatment along the boulevard and provisions for seating and public art near the entries to the
major central tenant spaces. Staff has also worked with the applicant to provide the boulevard
connection to the Madonna Road Plaza shopping center near Sears.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Grant final approval of project plans, with or without items to return to staff or the
Commission.
2. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on further information needs
and necessary revisions to address project issues, as identified in this report and provided by
the comments of the Commission.
3. Deny the project. Action denying the application should include the basis for denial.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The comments from other City departments are attached to this report
RECOMMENDATION
Provide comments on the Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and grant schematic
approval of plans with direction on items to return to the Commission with final review of plans
including:
• the appropriateness of using compact spaces along proposed pedestrian walkways through
parking lots (give justification);
1 -36
ARC 153 -98
Page 7
• the appropriateness of using tree wells in rows of parking spaces, rather then landscaped
fingers after every 6 spaces;
• provide complying motorcycle and bicycle parking spaces;
• retain some on -site trees currently slated for removal;
• enliven the "alley" (boulevard) views of buildings by the addition of storefronts or display
cases in arched forms of walls;
• look at further techniques to reduce the apparent mass of buildings, proposals for screening
loading, and ways to improve the appearance of less prominent elevations;
• provide a more substantial setback of 15' -30' to allow for denser planting along Dalidio
Drive;
• include elevations of rear walls of outlying buildings to verify that they are adequately
articulated; and
• provide direction on the appropriateness of the height of reused parking lot standards.
Attached:
Vicinity map
e Site plan
98 Applicant's project description dated 8 -20 -98
ARC Site lighting design criteria
e_ -r{- Memos from Public Works, Utilities, Fire, Building & the County Airport Land Use
Commission
Initial Study ER 153 -98
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 Series)
1 -37
ORDINANCE NO. 1015 (1984 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
APPROVING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
- SAN LUIS OBISPO MALL AND HOTEL AT 353 MADONNA ROAD (PD 1165) -
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have held hearings to
consider appropriate zoning for subject property in accordance with Section
65800 et. seq. of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the rezoning has been evaluated in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental Impact
Procedures and Guidelines, a final environmental impact report has been
certified, and a supplement has been considered; and
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning promotes the public health, safety and
general welfare;
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. The Council makes the following findings:
1. That the development plan is consistent with the general plan.
2. That the status of environmental impacts is as follows:
A. Impacts on animal life will not be significant.
— B. Facts of these types may be reduced to acceptable levels through
revision_-e,to the project as originally proposed or by conditions of
project approval enumerated below: land -use trends; public
services; utilities; noise levels; geologic and seismic hazards or
topographic modifications; surface water flaw (drainage and
flooding) and water quality; air quality; population distribution
and growth; community plans and .goals; archaeological resources;
energy use.
C. Impacts of these types are significant and unavoidable. No feasible
mitigation measures are available to reduce the impacts to
insignificant levels. Overriding concerns — implementation of
general -plan policies for retail expansion — will outweigh the
risks of environmental damage: traffic circulation; agricultural
_ — land conversion (plant life); aesthetics.
O 1015
1 -38 .
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 series)
Page 2
3. That the planned development satisfies criteria a, d, and a of zoning
regulations Section 9204.4.D.1.
Section 2. The preliminary development plan is approved subject to the
following conditions:
Conditions:
1.
Within siz months of approval of the preliminary development plan, the
applicant shall file a final development.plan, as required by the Zoning
Regulations,, for consideration by.the Cit• founcil. The final
development plan shall show all proposed ...wiications and abandonments and
all new utility lines. The precise configuration of streets and drives
- —
shown on the plan shall be based upon study and recommendation by a
—
traffic engineer, to the approval of the City Engineer. The final
development-plan shall include all items required for final architectural
review and final architectural review shall have been conducted prior to
Council consideration. The final development plan shall be effective
only after approval by the City Council.
2.
Grading and construction plans shall be accompanied by:
a. A soils report prepared by a qualified engineer, including
recommended measures to adequately.prepare the site for paving,
drainage, and support of building foundations.
a. A hydraulic study prepared by a qualified engineer, supporting
drainage structure design and demonstrating compliance with the
city's Flood Damage Prevention Regulations.
3.
Prior to issuance of construction permits for any structure which would
cross lot lines on the project site, a lot combination map (minor
subdivision) shall be submitted and approved.
4.
Any applications for subdivisions which may be required as a result of
proposed sale or lease of parts of the development shall indicate the
_ -
relationship of proposed parcels to the total site, access and utility
easements, and parking sufficient for the uses on individual parcels. At
the time of filing any required map, the applicant shall provide a draft
reciprocal easement agreement for review and approval by the Community
Development Department and the City Attorney.
5.
Prior to issuance of construction permits for any structure which would
cross the property line between the project site and Madonna Road plaza.
an agreement among owners of both properties and the city concerning
compliance with applicable codes, approved by the Chief Building Official
and the City Attorney, shall be recorded.
6.
If a portion of E1 Mercado (formerl• .lie Joaquin) is abandoned, the
applicant shall submit to the city for recordation easements:
L�
1 -39
-- - Ordinance No. 1015 k 4 Series)
Page
3
'- -
A. For the benefit of the Madonna Read Plaza property, allowing access
over the San Luis Obispo Mall site (in a form which would
accommodate Emergency vehicles and semi- trailers) to the portion of
Madonna Road Plaza adjacent to Highway 101; and
B. For the benefit of the San Luis Obispo Mall property and the public,
allowing access along the private drive formerly occupied by Calle
Joaquin.
C. Prior to issuance of construction permits, applicant shall submit
evidence in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney that an
agreement has been recorded to run with the land providing for
maintenance of the drive formerly occupied by Calle Joaquin jointly
by the owners of the San Luis Obispo Mall site and the Madonna Road
Plaza site.
tF
- 7.
The final developme,-it plan shall conform with the preliminary site plan
dated March 29, 1984, and indicating the following:
• Use Maximum Gross Building Area
Major, broad -line, non- discount 74,230 square feet
department store
Tires, batteries, and automotive 41850 square feet
accessories facility associated
with department store.
Drugstore 25,000 square feet
*.retail shops 103,700 square feet
(SUBTOTAL) 2070,780 square feet
Pads for not more than four 30.000 square felt
freestanding buildings.
(SUBTOTAL) 249,750 square feet
Interior Mall space 33,300 square feet
TOTAL 284,750 square feet
Parking for about 1,400 cars, with convenient motorcycle and bicycle
parking, as required by the Zoning Regulations.
8.
The hotel shall include approximately 10,000 square feet of flexible,
o -)nference- meeting space.
- - 9.
The total project shall be cr,,,patible with the existing and proposed
buildings at Madonna Road Plaza, through design, building orientation and
location, and with provisions for pedestrian circulation, to the approval
of the Architectural Review Commission and City Council.
1-40
Ordinance No. 1013 (1984 Series)
Page 4
10. The mall itself shall be vented so that natural air circulation may be
used rather than mechanical ventilation.
11.. The roof of the mall and hotel complex shall include skylights,
appropriately glazed to prevent unwanted heat gain while allowing natural
illumination.
12. Entries to the mall and to separate lease spaces shall be designed to
`allow controlled public access to the spaces and secure closure of the
mall itself when the shops are not in operation.
13. Exterior entries to the mall and to the major tenant spaces shall be an
"air -lock" or equivalent design to minimize unwanted exchange of indoor
and outdoor air.
14. A. Prior to filing the final development plans, applicant shall provide
an analysis by a qualified person evaluating the technical and
economical feasibility of solar heating for water used by the hotel.
In approving the final development plan, the city may require those
solar applications which have a pay -back period of eight years or
less.
B. The roof structure of the hotel shall be designed to accommodate
future installation of a wind- energy - conversion or photovoltaic
system, to be certified by a qualified designer prior to issuance of
building permits.
15. A landscape strip along the southwestern and southeastern site boundaries
(including the Highway 101 frontage) averaging at least 20 feet wide
shall be planted with dense; evergreen trees and shrubs, with intermixing
of species to provide variety of color and form and seasonal change.
— - 16.— So far as possible, existing mature trees along Highway 101 shall be
retained. The areas shall be planted and maintainMi to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director.
17. Surfaces of all planting areas shall be porous, with no plistic barrier.
><' is. The landscape strip along tLe Madonna Road frontage shall have a minimum
_— width of 20 ft. along parking areas and 40 feet along buildings, measured
from the prcperty line after road widening. The landscape strip along
the El Mercado alignment shall have a minimum width of 10 feet. Both
strips shall be planted with a combination of groundcover, shrubs and
trees which at maturity will be in scale with the buildings and which
will provide a variety of colors and forms and which will be suitable for
and provide protection in a windy setting. Box specimen trees shall be
interspersed with sapling trees throughout the entire project.
Landscaped berms and box specimen trees shall be used near ark] around U:e
hotel entrance to minimize the apparent height of the building.
19. Trees shall be provided within parking rows, separated by not more than
eiqM spaces, and at the ends of each row. Trees shall be planted in
deep -root, curb- protected planters. The types of trees shall be approved
by the Community Development Department (broad canopy trees are to be
used in parking areas).
1-41
Page 5
20. An on -site well shall provide all water for landscape irrigation via an
appropriately designed system with no cross — connection to the city water
system. The existing agricultural well may be used.
21. Site drainage shall be designed to the approval of the City Engineer:
a. The proposed culvert extension shall be capable of carrying a
25 -year design -storm flow, as a minimum.
b.- Accumulated drainage, including the cross -site channel, shall be
underground with concrete inverts and inlets at appropriate
locations.
—"
C. A velocity- reduction structure may be required at the point where
the culvert leaves the site.
d. A grease and oil separator or separators shall be installed where
collected parking -lot drainage enters the main culvert. They shall
be located and designed to facilitate maintenance.
-- 22. Parking lot lighting shall provide adequate illumination for safety and
shall be designed to direct light downward to minimize sky glare and
horizontal glare.and.in scale with the surxxVkiing area.
23. Parking lot lighting circuits shall be designed to allow parking serving
uses such as restaurants expected to be in operation longer than other
uses to be lighte3 while other areas are not.
24. The submittal for final architectural approval shall include a signing
plan indicating location, size, materials, copy, and lighting of all
proposed signs. Unless specifically excepted by the Architectural Rpview
Commission, signs shall be limited to identification of the shooping
center, the department store, drugstore, and hotel, and freestanding
building occupants. Signing shall be compatible throughout the project.
25. The area offered for dedication for future extension of Zozobra Lane
shall be improved as a drive, except that the base shall be prepared for
ultimate development as an arterial street to the approval of the City
Engineer.
26. The drive indicated at the end of Zozobra Lane shall be designed so as
not to interfere with drives to the Post Office and to provide a safe
pedestrian crossing, to the approval of the City Engineer.
27. Applicant shall offer to dedicate and improve street r44.:-.:- tZ-way (o) to
accommodate the widening of Madonna Road along the project frontage by a
uniform 40 feet and (b) to aoc�mmodate the widening of E1 Mercaft between
Madonna Road and the drive intersecting from the southwest to a 74 -foot
right- of-way (including a right -turn lane).
28. The applicant shall submit street improvement plans prepared by a civil
engineer for approval by the City Engineer.
1-42
Ordinance No. 1015 (19b, .ieries)
Page 6
29. Applicant shall install a landscaped median barrier in Madonna Road to
prevent left turns at the Madonna Road drive and to provide turn pockets
for left turns from Madonna Road to Zozobra Lane and to E1 Mercado, to_
_. the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
30. A. Prior to issuance of construction permita, applicant shall submit a
written agreement, to the approval of the City Engineer, agreeing to
pay the city $22,750 toward the cost of installing traffic signals
at Madonna Road and E1 Mercado and 100 percent of the estimated cost
of modifications or additions to the signals which may be necessary
to accommodate changed traffic patterns or street widening resulting
from the project.
B. Applicant shall offer to dedicate right- of-way to aacamr -idate future
freeway access from an extension of Zozobra Lane, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
31. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the city must have received
dedication of Zozobra Lane from the fee owner and the city must have
accepted for maintenance the existing street improvements.
32. Prior to issuance of construction permits for the mall connection to
Sears, the city must have abandoned that portion of E1 Mercado indicated
in the final development plan, subject to acceptance of access and
utility easements by the city and affected public utilities, and an
agreement between city and applicant concerning relocation or special
protection and valves for city water and sewer lines must have been
executed and any required bond posted.
33. Applicant shall pay city the cost of a 2 -in.-b asphalt blanket on E1
Mercado as determined by the City Engineer or shall include this
improvement in the applicant's paveout of E1 Mercado, at the option of
the City Engineer. Applicant shall reconstruct E1 Mercado to the
approval of the City Engineer and in conformance with the approved final
development plan.
34. Applicant shall fully improve all street_ right -of -gray dedicated to the
city with base,-paving, curb, gutter .end sidewalks, to. the approval of
the City Engineer.
35. Applicant shall install traffic control signs and pavement and curb
markings (including those features deemed necessary for pedestrian safety
on and im ediately adjacent to the site) to the approval of the City
-- — Engineer.
36. Applicant shall offer to dedicate at least 32 feet for street
right- of-way and sign an agreement (to be recorded) to install street
improvements upon notice by the City Engineer, for the future extension
of Zozobra to the southeast, to the approval of the City Engineer.
1-43
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 Series)
Page 7
37. Applicant shall offer to dedicate and improve additional right- of-way for
widening of Zozobra Lane to a full right- of-way width of 64 feet along
the frontage between Madonna Road and the drive into the project site. -
38. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the city must have established
a formal arrangement for participation by the applicant in paying for
changes to the Madonna Road interchange at Highway 101. The applicant
shall pay for at least 20 percent of the estimated cost, determined by
the City Engineer. The timing and manner of payment shall be established
by the terms of the formal agreement.
46. Grading and excavation plans shall include a note that work is to stop
upon discovering any archaeological materials. Applicant shall provide
contractors with descriptions to help them recognize such materials, upon
the advise of a qualified archaeologist. If archaeological materials are
discovered, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist can assess
the find anal an appropriate Native American group can be notified. Any
costs incurred as a result of this condition shall be funded by the
applicant.
1-44
A. Applicant shall pay for undergrounding the existing electrical
distribution pole line along E1 Mercado and shall be responsible for
making all arrangements with utility companies -for maintenance of
service in that area.
—
B. New on -site or off -site sewer main with mar ales may be required by
the City Engineer.
40.
Downstream erosion control measures may be required by the City Engineer
as a condition of grading approval.
- — -11.
Construction shall commence within 12 months of final development plan
— —
approval and continue in a timely fashion with the project (excluding the
connection to Sears) completed in a single phase.
42.
Grading and eampaction shall be carried out in a single dry construction
season, from May to October. If site - preparation work cannot be
completed in one season, catch basins are to be installed to retain
— -
sediMent on the site and exposed soils are to be mulched aid /ok
s
hydroseeded to minimize soil erosion.
43.
Earth- {roving equipment and truck traffic are to use Madonna Road north of
El Mercado and avoid residential parts of Madonna Road and Los Osos
Valley Road.
44.
Dust abatement procedures (including moistening exposed soils and
moistening or covering loaded trucks leaving or entering the site) are to
be employed throughout site preparation. Applicant shall specify in
grading plans that the City Engineer may suspend work if dust generation
on -site together with strong winds would create a nuisance or hazards on
neighboring property, streets, or Higtniay 101.
45.
Soil is to be removed from the treads of major equipment before such
equipment uses city streets.
46. Grading and excavation plans shall include a note that work is to stop
upon discovering any archaeological materials. Applicant shall provide
contractors with descriptions to help them recognize such materials, upon
the advise of a qualified archaeologist. If archaeological materials are
discovered, work shall cease until a qualified archaeologist can assess
the find anal an appropriate Native American group can be notified. Any
costs incurred as a result of this condition shall be funded by the
applicant.
1-44
'Ordinance too. 1015 (19P cries)
— Rage 8
4.7. Prior to approval of the final development plan, applicant shall remove
the billboard located on the site.
48. Applicant shall safety prune existing trees which are to remain and _
- remove stumps, fallen limbs, field-crop stakes, debris, and trash from
the area near Highway 101. The areas shall be planted and maintained.
49. Interior lighting and parking -lot lighting shall be turned off when uses
served by the parking are closed (allowing sufficient time for employees
to have left), except that lighting for security will remain on.
50. Parking areas shall be cleaned according to a schedule established by the
City Engineer with a vacuum sweeper to control litter and reduce water
pollution, and the site shall be maintained in an orderly and attractive
manner.
51. The developer shall provide the following transit incentives:
A. A bus loading zone and sheltered passenger waiting area, west of the
auto service (TBA) facility. Final design shall be subject to
approval of the Public Works Department transit coordinator. The
shelter shall provide protection from sun, wind, and rain, and shall
be adequately lighted and identified. The bits loading area shall
include standard city bus signs, seating, trash recepticles, and an
enclosed display case. The shelter shall be maintained by the
project owner (bus system information will be maintained by the
city).
B. Pavement section for the bus route shall be to the approval of the
City Engineer.
C. Stop signs to minimize delay for bus turning shall be provided at
intersections of project drives with E1 Mercado and Zczobra Lane, to
the approval of the City Engineer.
D. A bus information board shall be located inside the enclosed mall,
to the approval of the city transit coordinator. Bus system
information will be maintained by the city and the display board
shall be maintained by the project owner.
E. Developer shall provide a regularly scheduled shuttle service with
downtown stop for hotel guests.
F. Project tenants shall provide (1) mini - shuttle service for one year
to be financed by the developer. Shuttle service to be on a
regularly - scheduled basis between the Madonna Road shopping area and
the downtown; (2) bus systems information and passes for all
employees; and (3) bus system information and tokens or similar
_ reduced -fare incentives for shoppers, integrated with promotional
material; all coordinated with the Public Works Department.
1-45
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 Series)
Page 9
G. Applicant shall cooperate with the Public.Works Department in an
effort to provide expanded bus service, particularly during seasonal
peaks, in conjunction with Madonna Road area and downtown merchants.
52. The developer shall provide the following to accommodate and encourage
use of bicycles:
A. Key- operated lockers shall be provided to accommodate at least 20
bicycles. The lockers shall count toward the required bicycle
parking spaces.
B. The project shall include at least two showers for male employees
and two showers for female employees (accessible to all project
employees), located conveniently with respect to a major tenant's
employee locker area.
C. Bicycle parking areas shall include racks for locking to the
approval of Community Development Department staff. !
53. No more than 2310,750 square feet of retail floor shall be occupied prior
to June 1, 1987. Any building or area intended for delayed occupancy
_ shall be designed and maintained to present an attractive appearance, to
the approval of the Community Development Director.
—54. To provide greater security for hotel occupants, suites shall be provided
with nonreproducible keys-
-55. Final plans shall include a fire control room, readily accessible from
the outside at the ground level and providing central fire monitoring and
control equipment, to the approval of the City Fire Department.
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney,
together with the names of councilmembers voting for and against, shall be
published once, at least three (3) days prior to its final passage, in the
Telegram- Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said city, aad the
same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its said
final passage.
- INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo at a meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of July on motion of
Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilman Settle, and on the following roll
call vote:
1-46
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM # 2
BY: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner f'f?, MEETING DATE: December 7, 1998
FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manage / `
FILE NUMBER: ARC 153 -98
PROJECT ADDRESS: 321 Madonna Road
SUBJECT: Review of plans to redevelop the existing Central Coast Mall located on the
southeast side of Madonna Road and west of Highway 101.
Approve the Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and grant final approval to the
project, based on findings, and with conditions, mitigation measures and code requirements.
BACKGROUND:
Situation
The applicant has filed plans for environmental review and architectural review to redevelop the
existing Central Coast Mall site. After initial review of plans at an ARC meeting last month, the
applicant have made revisions to plans and is requesting final approval of the project by the
Commission.
Previous Review
On November 2, 1998, the ARC on a 6 -1 vote (Commr. Stevenson voting no), the ARC
supported the content and conclusions of the Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures,
and granted the project schematic approval with direction regarding revisions to plans and
additional information to be included in plans for final architectural review. Commission
direction noted general support for the site plan including the bulk of proposed tree removals and
allowance for some compact parking, tree wells, instead of "forger- type" planters, and head -in
parking spaces. The ARC wanted to see more individuality in building designs in general, and
directed that the buildings located near Dalidio Drive be moved further back from the street (at
least a 20 -foot setback) and also better address the street. The ARC also asked the applicant to
consider the addition of some type of gateway feature, either an architectural element or
landscaping, at the project boulevard's intersection with Dalidio Drive.
Data Summary
Address: 321 Madonna Road
1-47
ARC 153 -98
Page 2
Applicant: MBK Southern California Ltd.
Representative: RRM Design Group
Zoning: C -R -PD (Retail Commercial with the Planned Development overlay)
General Plan: General Retail
Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration of environmental impact was
recommended by the Development Review Manager on October 12, 1998.
Project Action Deadline: January 8, 1999
Site Description
The project site includes approximately 24 acres and is developed with an approximately
230,000 sq.ft. enclosed mall, four freestanding pad buildings and parking lot areas with
landscaping. The site is surrounded by Highway 101, Madonna Road, the Madonna Plaza
Shopping Center and the undeveloped Dalidio property.
Project Description
The project is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the same type of
retail uses. Portions of existing buildings would be demolished and replaced with new
construction. The reconfigured project will result in a slight net loss of retail floor area, about
2,000 square feet less than currently exists.
The four outlying pad buildings nearest Madonna Road, Gottschalks and the hotel would be
retained. The central portion of the mall would be demolished and replaced with new
construction to accommodate an expansion to Gottschalks, three larger tenants (23,625 sq.ft.-
30,000 sq.ft.) and smaller shops (total of 5,000 sq.ft.). A pedestrian and automobile boulevard is
proposed between these new central buildings to connect the site with the adjacent Madonna
Road Plaza Shopping Center and ultimately with the planned Marketplace project on the Dalidio
property. Three outlying pads are also proposed with varying building sizes. The total square
footage of the redeveloped site would be 255,497 sq.ft. (258,100 sq.ft. currently exist).
Plans indicate that a total of 1,288 parking spaces will be provided to accommodate both the
hotel (314 spaces), and existing and proposed retail development (974 spaces). A parking ratio
of one parking space for each 262 square feet of retail floor area will exist with site
redevelopment. The entire parking lot east of the north -south running driveway between Taco
Bell and Gottschalks will be reconfigured to provide planned parking. A total of 302 trees will
be removed to accommodate the reconfigured parking lot.
Project History
Back in 1984 when plans for the Central Coast Mall were being reviewed by the City, many in
the community were concerned that the development would have dire impacts on the economic
vitality of the downtown. Despite these concerns, the mall project was approved by the City
through a "PD ", planned development zoning. With the PD, conditions were imposed on the
project including types of uses, required parking, public improvements and lighting (see attached
Ordinance No. 1015 (1984 Series)). Because of the PD, a development plan was approved by the
1-48
ARC 153 -98
Page 3
Planning Commission and City Council, in addition to approval of plans by the Architectural
Review Commission.
After its completion in 1987, spaces in the mall were mostly leased out for the next several years.
However, over the last five years, the opposite has been true and most of the mall space is
currently vacant. The applicant is now proposing to revitalize the mall by keeping the successful
components of the current project, and replacing the bulk of the interior mall space with new
separate pad buildings. The applicant in an attached project description indicates that the
objective of the new pad buildings is to attract larger tenants that desire separate identity and
parking accessibility.
EVALUATION
The applicant submitted a letter dated 11 -23 -98 that responds to the items numbered 1 -13 in the
ARC follow -up letter dated 11 -6 -98. The following paragraphs highlight project changes in
response to ARC direction:
1. Parking
A total of 974 parking spaces are proposed to accommodate both existing and proposed retail
development. This total is 13 spaces less than shown on plans previously reviewed by the ARC.
The spaces that were eliminated include: two in front of Major Tenant A (prevent conflicts with
back -up & nearby driveway), two each adjacent to Pads 5 & 6 (total of 4), three at Major E and
four at the gateway.
The total number of parking spaces has not been an issue with the review of plans, but other
ancillary issues with the physical development of parking were brought out in the last ARC
report. Despite raising them as potential concerns, the ARC generally endorsed the parking lot
plan with the limited use of compact spaces, tree wells instead of planter "finger" islands, and
"head -in" style parking in front of major tenants.
• Issue: Compact Spaces
A majority of the parking spaces to be provided will be "average" size spaces consistent with the
City's Parking & Driveway Standards. The exception to this is the 56 parking spaces on either
side of two pedestrian pathways through the parking lot that run between central major tenants
and new outlying pads near Dalidio Drive.
Commission Direction: The Commission asked the applicant to look at the feasibility of
eliminating these compact spaces, including possibly narrowing adjacent pedestrian pathways
through the parking lot.
Applicant's Response: Plans were not modified to eliminate any of the proposed compact
spaces. The applicant's letter refers to Sheet No. 12 which has enlarged site plan and section of
the proposed pedestrian walkways with adjacent parking. The letter notes that the proposed
design allows for a 4-foot wide sidewalk along with planters if compact spaces are allowed.
1 -49
i
ARC 153 -98
Page 4
Staff's Analysis: The ARC's direction suggested that the issue be explored, but did not strongly
mandate the elimination of the compacts. A 4 -foot wide sidewalk is the minimum allowed by
Title 24, Accessibility Code, and is really necessary for safety reasons. Also the car overhang
used in City standards beyond the wheel stop or curb is 30 inches or 2.5 feet, not the 2 feet
shown in the detail, which makes the design even tighter. Unless precise plans indicate that there
is more space than reflected in current plans, it does not appear that elimination of the compact
spaces is feasible, without some redesign, or the further elimination of parking spaces.
The Commission should cite the relatively small percentage of compact spaces to total spaces, 56
of 1,288 total spaces, or 4.3 %, as a rationale for allowing the limited use of compact spaces in the
project.
o Issue: "Bead -in" Parking Spaces along Main Project Access
The proposed parking spaces directly in front of new central mid -boxes directly conflict with the
flow of traffic down the main access road through the shopping center in front of buildings. Staff
had suggested that these spaces be eliminated, but the applicant felt strongly that these spaces
were necessary to the success of the types of clients that they are trying to attract and not a safety
concern.
Commission Direction: The ARC agreed with the applicant and allowed these spaces to be
retained in the project.
Staff's Analysis: If these parking spaces are installed as proposed, the Public Works Department
suggests that the adjacent 30' wide travel lane be delineated with street type striping. This
should improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away from the parked cars
as possible. A condition is recommended which notes this requirement.
a Issue: Motorcycle & Bicycle Parking
A total of 38 motorcycle spaces are shown on plans and are well disbursed through the site. This
number is consistent with ARC direction.
Short-term bicycle parking in racks are shown for all major tenant spaces. The locations for
these racks look appropriate for the new central tenant spaces. However, the locations for racks
for outlying buildings may need to be adjusted depending on tenants and their selections for
entries. Long -term bicycle parking needs to provided for all clusters of buildings either through
lockers or appropriate internal storage. This information can return to staff for approval during
building permit plan check.
2. Da6dio Drive Building Setback
The ARC directed that the outlying buildings, Pads 5 & 6 and Major E, provide a more
substantial setback of 20 feet to allow for denser planting. Previous plans showed these
1-50
ARC 153 -98
Page 5
buildings set back from the property line 10' -11'. The applicant responded to this direction by
revising plans to show an 18 -foot setback.
While the proposed 18 -foot setback is 2 feet shallower than directed, staff feels that the revised
plans reflect a concerted effort to comply with direction, and will provide a substantial street yard
for buffer planting.
3. Tree Removals
The total redevelopment of the central parking lot will result in the removal of many mature and
attractive trees. A plan has been submitted which shows the general outline of existing vegetation
in relationship to the proposed reconfigured layout. Virtually every tree in the area of the
redeveloped parking lot, a total of 302 trees, will be removed. As noted in the attached initial
study, the removal of these trees will change the number and diversity of plant species on the site.
The City Arborist has reviewed project plans and does not object to the removal of the bulk of
existing trees, which include oaks, Monterey & Bishop pines, London Planes and Myoporums. He
has indicated that some of the existing London Plane (Platanus acerifolia) trees are not particularly
healthy and may be removed without specific mitigation. However, the Coast Live Oak trees are
considered more significanttree specimens.
Mitigation Measure No. 5 includes a requirementthat several existing Coast Live Oak trees may be
removed with the condition that they are replanted at nearby Laguna Lake Park. In its
consideration of project tree removals, the City's Tree Committee heard from the applicant that a
$20,000 budget had been set aside for the replanting of the oaks. The Tree Committee on a 3 -1
vote ultimately supported proposed tree removals with the noted mitigation for the oaks.
Commission Direction: Addition of 336 trees on the site as indicated on the project landscaping
plan will help compensate for the loss of trees proposed to be removed. The ARC took this into
consideration in their general endorsement of the site plan when schematic approval was granted.
However, the ARC did ask the applicant to look at saving trees with the required shift in outlying
buildings from Dalidio Drive.
Applicant's Response: The setbacks for Buildings Major E and Pads 5 & 6 have been increased
from 10' -11' to 18' from the Dalidio Drive property line. In RRM's response letter, the
applicant indicates that they looked at saving some of the trees between proposed buildings and
the planned sidewalk, but were unable to because of the proximity of the new sidewalk and
grading changes. The letter indicates that the trees that could be saved are of types of species
(pines and eucalyptus) that the City Arborist has indicated could be removed.
Staffs Response: Although staff understands that it will not be feasible to save all of these
trees, it appears that there may be the opportunity to save some of them. While some of the trees
may not be preferred species, they appear to be well - established and healthy specimens that
should be saved if possible.
Planning staff asked for input from the Public Works Department on the applicant's response.
1 -51
ARC 153 -98
Page 6
The memo from Public Works indicates that there is not adequate information provided to make
a definitive determination. They note that the planting of the existing street trees was done to
accommodate the future installation of a 6 -foot wide sidewalk. Therefore, they request that the
applicant provide cross- sections at those locations where they say the existing street trees cannot
be saved. They add that these sections must show existing and finished grades, as well as
accurate base elevations and locations of the existing trees.
4. Buildine Design
As noted on Page 3 of the applicant's project description, the strategy with the design for new
buildings has been to utilize predominant shapes and scale found in the existing project, but to
also incorporate some variation through new accent materials (brick veneer), architectural
features (towers) and color palettes. The predominant exterior material is stucco which will be
used for walls, columns, parapets and bases. Roofing will be the same concrete flat tiles used on
the existing buildings, as well as a standing seam metal on tower features. A colors and materials
board has not been submitted yet, but will be available for ARC review at the meeting.
While the ARC understood the motivations for the building design shown in previous plans
(reduced copies of previous plans are attached for comparison purposes), they clearly felt that
buildings could benefit from additional articulation and differentiation. The ARC provided the
following specific direction in regard to building architecture:
Commission Direction: Enliven the "alley" (boulevard) views of buildings by the addition of
storefronts or display cases in arched forms of walls.
Applicant's Response: Changes made to the alley elevation of buildings include:
• more variety in building heights and forms;
• wider and more decorative banding or fascias;
• scoring patterns in stucco walls; and
• additional storefronts.
Commission Direction: Pads 5 & 6 and Major E should be redesigned to better address the
street (Dalidio Drive).
Applicant's Response. These buildings have been modified as noted above with "alley"
elevations, along with the addition of arch patterns and other decorative patterns in fascias. The
applicant indicates that these buildings have been revised to reflect the theme of varied forms,
materials and colors. Their response also notes that a "vocabulary" of architectural elements
shown in elevations could be interchanged to meet the needs of future tenants.
Commission Direction: Consider enlivening building elevations by providing individuality in
designs and variety in colors and materials.
Applicant's Response: The applicant has followed already described techniques along with
varying materials and colors to add interest to the design of the proposed buildings.
1 -52
ARC 153 -98
Page 7
Staffs Analysis: In staff's opinion, the applicant has taken the ARC's direction to heart and
made significant changes to enliven building architecture. The use of varied roof heights and
forms, along with changes in colors, materials and detailing does much to help reduce the
massive and linear appearance of proposed buildings.
Staff feels that the alley elevations are much improved, supports staff review of minor changes to
outlying buildings consistent with the established design "vocabulary", and likes the appearance
of Majors B & C. However, staff feels that the elevation for Major D might be further
articulated. Staff had the same initial concern with Major A, but understands the strategy to tie it
in with the adjacent Gottschalks since this space will house an expansion of that existing store.
5. Gateway Feature
Commission Direction: The ARC asked the applicant to provide some type of a gateway feature
at the intersection of the new on -site boulevard with Dalidio Drive.
Applicant's Response. A tower element was added to the corner of Pad 5 near the west side of
the intersection and a curvilinear screen wall with brick columns added on the east. In addition
to the screen wall, a 3 -foot high berm with annual color plants is proposed in front of it and tall
columnar trees behind it.
Staffs Analysis: Staff feels that the tower element added to Pad 5 creates an interesting
architectural element which ties in with the architecture of the major tenants in central buildings.
It also provides a natural gateway feature which help frame and highlight the boulevard entry off
of Dalidio Drive. The proposed wall and landscaping help balance and finish off the gateway.
Additional finishing suggestions for the gateway might include flag poles and signage.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on further information needs
and necessary revisions to address project issues, as identified in this report and provided by
the comments of the Commission.
2. Deny the project. Action denying the application should include the basis for denial.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The comments from other City departments are attached to this report, and where relevant,
incorporated as conditions or code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, and grant final approval of the
project, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions, mitigation
measures and code requirements:
1 -53
ARC 153 -98
Page 8
F
1. The project, which is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the
same type of retail uses, is appropriate in this General Retail commercial setting, will be
compatible with surrounding development and will contribute to the quality of life in San
Luis Obispo, consistent with goals contained in the City's Architectural Review Guidelines.
2. The Community Development Director has determined that changes to the approved planned
development at the site could adequately be evaluated through review of plans by the
Architectural Review Commission.
3. The project which includes a proposed new boulevard between proposed building pads to
link the project with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is consistent with Land Use
Element Policy 3.7.10 encourages more cohesion between the existing shopping centers on
Madonna Road.
4. The project will add interest to the shopping center and help achieve goals to make the center
more pedestrian- friendly.
5. The use of compact parking spaces is supported in this project along the pedestrian walkways
through parking lots, because it provides for a reasonable use of the space given site
development constraints and project goals, and the number of compact spaces as a percentage
of overall parking spaces is minor (4.3 %).
6. Mitigation measures established for the project (ER 153 -98) have been reviewed and
adequately address potential impacts resulting from the redevelopment of a retail commercial
project on this site.
Conditions
1. Walkways along pedestrian linkages through the parking lot shall be a minimum of 4 feet in
width consistent with Title 24, Accessibility Code.
2. The adjacent 30' wide travel lane of the main access road through the shopping center in
front of buildings with "head -in" parking shall be delineated with street type striping to
improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away from the parked cars as
possible, to the approval of the Director of Public Works.
3. A total of 38 motorcycle spaces as shown on plans is approved to accommodate site
development as redeveloped.
4. Precise locations of required short-term bicycle spaces in racks near the entries to buildings
shall be to the approval of the Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and
Community Development Department (Planning) staffs.
1-54
ARC 153 -98
Page 9
5. The project shall provide long -term bicycle spaces for all clusters of buildings, either in a
designated storage area in the building or in fully - enclosed lockers, to the approval of the
Public Works Department (Transportation Division) and Community Development
Department (Planning) staffs.
6. Prior to the removal of any trees along the Dalidio frontage between the back of the future
sidewalk and proposed buildings, the applicant shall submit adequate information for the
City Arborist to evaluate proposed tree removals. This information shall consist of cross -
sections, at those locations where plans indicate that the existing street trees cannot be saved,
showing existing and finished grades, as well as accurate base elevations and locations of the
existing trees.
7. The front elevation of Major Tenant "D" shall be further articulated, consistent with ARC
direction, to the approval of Planning staff during building permit plan check.
8. When specific tenants are known, the applicant shall return to the ARC at a later date with a
comprehensive sign program.
9. The reuse of existing parking lot lights which are 38 feet in height was approved.
10. The street right -of -way line is 3 ft. behind the curb face along El Mercado. Construction
details of the alternative paving and materials are subject to approval by the Director of
Public Works. The City shall not be responsible for repair or replacement of any decorative
pavement other than standard asphalt concrete. The developer shall be responsible for
replacement of any damaged non - typical gray concrete.
11. Dalidio Dr. is currently a private St. southerly of the main Dalidio Dr. mall entrance near the
Post Office. The remainder is offered for public street purposes, but not yet accepted by the
City until completion of the street and additional right -of -way from the adjacent property
owner. An easement exists for the maintenance of the existing public water main and public
utilities. Standard 6 ft. sidewalk shall be constructed along this frontage with the project,
unless a postponement or waiver is approved by the Public Works Director as a result of an
approved realignment of Dalidio Dr. in conjunction with the proposed "Market Place"
project.
12. Street trees along El Mercado and Dalidio Dr. (Prado Rd) frontages shall meet City standards
as to size and species to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, with consideration for existing
utilities.
13. The existing flood zone must be plotted on the plans as denoted on the grading plan for the
existing plaza. Satellite building pads #6 and Major E may need to be raised above the 100 -
yr storm water surface elevation.
14. There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly driveways)
that serve the existing mall development. Drainage from the modified parking lot, driveways
and buildings must conform to the existing pattern or modified as needed, to the satisfaction
1 -55
ARC 153 -98
Page 10
of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Any proposed changes
must consider any resulting changes in the 100 -year floodplain. (See 5. above)
Mitigation Measures
1. Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety Element, a detailed
soils engineering report needs to be submitted at the time of building permit which considers
special grading and construction techniques necessary to address the potential for
liquefaction and issues associated with expansive soils. It shall identify the soil profile on site
and provide site preparation recommendations to ensure against unstable soil conditions.
Grading and building must be designed and performed in compliance with the soils
engineering report.
2. The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing shopping center shall be
plotted on working drawings submitted for a building permit for the redevelopment project.
The finish floor of any affected project buildings shall be raised to a minimum of one foot
above the 100 -year storm water surface elevation consistent with the City's Flood Damage
Prevention Regulations.
3. The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site during the lunch hour;
• extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from
automobiles.
4. In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land Use Plan, the
property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of
San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport
via an avigation easement document available at the Community Development Department.
5. Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into the project
landscaping plan. Where proposed plans do not allow for the retention of existing trees, the
applicant shall incorporate new trees into the landscaping plan to compensate for trees removed
to the approval of the Architectural Review Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees are proposed to be removed. The developer shall prepare
a plan to the satisfaction of the City Arborist that provides for the replanting of a sufficient
number of existing specimens to nearby Laguna Lake Park. Removal shall be accomplished
using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory work under the direct supervision of a
certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated to an area at Laguna Lake Park designated by
the City Arborist and the site shall be prepared to receive said trees as directed by the City
Arborist. Trees not replanted shall be replaced with number, size, and species satisfactory to
the City Arborist.
6. Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
1 -56
ARC 153 -98
Page 11
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation.
• Energy - efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
7. To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
a. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for interior and exterior on -site
recycling.
b. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling
discarded materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction
site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or
the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance.
c. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and decorative building
components and in surfacing wherever feasible.
8. If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or
cultural materials, then construction activities which may affect them shall cease until the
extent of the resource is determined and appropriate protective measures are approved by the
Community Development Director. The Community Development Director shall be notified
of the extent and location of discovered materials so that they may be recorded by a qualified
archaeologist.
9. If pre - historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor should
be called in to work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of
artifacts shall comply with state and federal laws.
Code Requirements
1. A water allocation may be required, due to the additional units. Currently, a water allocation
can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City's Water Conservation
division can help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits.
2. If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized, Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an allocation through
retrofit could offset a portion of the required Water Impact Fee according to appropriate City
policies. The project will receive a credit for any water meters that are no longer needed and
are subsequently removed.
3. The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the City can
make a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure. If it is discovered
that an off -site deficiency exists, the owner will be required to mitigate the deficiency as a
part of the overall project. It is already known that the Laguna Lift Station is beyond
capacity. However, the City expects to have a replacement lift station with adequate capacity
constructed by 2001.
1-57
ARC 153 -98
Page 12
4. Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oil/sand separators or other
wastewater pre- treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste
Coordinator.
5. All existing fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire hydrant systems, fire protection
systems and appliances shall be modified to address the requirements of proposed
occupancies.
6. Where minimum required fire access width is provided, curbs shall be painted red with
appropriate signage installed to prohibit parking.
Attached:
Vicinity map
Site plan
ARC follow -up letter dated 11 -6 -98
Draft 11-&98 ARC minutes
RRM response letter dated 11 -23 -98
Public Works memo dated 11 -30-98
Previous elevations reviewed 11 -6-98
Applicant's project description dated 8 -20 -98
Site lighting design criteria
Memos from Public Works, Utilities, Fire, Building & the County Airport Land Use
Commission
Initial Study ER 153 -98
1 -58
Ifd"ir fir �I
3
C T
Laguna Lake
Park f• •� '%� .
MADCANNA
f •
c; O PLAZA
,
•} C-R -PD
j
\ ow �/ ��•, � 'yam
,\ 1
� 11
1r ''
D
M t
�. i• �LrT
G O •� fi %•
L
vicinity map ARC & ER 153 -98
321 Madonna Road
/ O
2
r
r
1-59
r
as
H fis
Fj
IE
Dow
:IJ t---
W
x r2
LU 2�
'0 1
z Qr
LU
LLI
V)
a-
z
9 9
i � --
��
ars-1�� 1 �1- �z
r
c
v
331
LU
NO
INC
I J
li p
LL
ti
CL
H fis
Fj
IE
Dow
:IJ t---
W
x r2
LU 2�
'0 1
z Qr
LU
LLI
V)
a-
z
0
CL
W
Ic-
1-60
9 9
i � --
��
ars-1�� 1 �1- �z
r
0
LU
NO
INC
I J
0
CL
W
Ic-
1-60
R.R.M. Design Group
Pat Blote
3701 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC 153 -98: 321 Madonna Road
Environmental and architectural review of plans to redevelop an
existing mall by replacing 150,000 square feet of existing retail
space, and other site modifications.
Dear Mr. Blote:
The Architectural Review Commission, at its meeting of November 2, 1998,
supported the content and conclusions of the Negative Declaration with
Mitigation Measures, and granted the project schematic approval with the
following direction regarding revisions to plans and additional information to be
included in plans for final architectural review:
The use of compact spaces along the two proposed pedestrian walkways
through parking lots could be justified because of their relatively small
proportion of the total parking spaces provided (4.3 %); however, the ARC
would prefer eliminating them if possible. Consideration may be given to
narrowing the adjacent walkways to accommodate average size car
spaces.
2. The use of tree wells in rows of parking spaces, rather than landscaped
fingers after every 6 spaces is acceptable.
3. The use of head -in parking spaces with no wheel stops along the main
project access driveway was supported.
4. Plans shall include bicycle parking in compliance with the requirements
stipulated in Terry Sanville's memo and a total of 38 motorcycle parking
spaces.
5. Enliven the "alley" (boulevard) views of buildings by the addition of
storefronts or display cases in arched forms of walls.
OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services. programs and activities. 1 -61
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781 -7410.
ARC 153-98 - 321 Madonna Road
Page 2
6. Provide a more substantial setback of 20 feet to allow for denser planting
along Dalidio Drive.
7. Tree removals were generally supported; however, the Commission asked
the applicant to look at saving trees if possible with the shift in the buildings
closest to Dalidio Drive.
8. Pads 5 & 6 and Major E should be redesigned to better address the street
(Dalidio Drive).
9. Consider enlivening building elevations by providing individuality in designs
and variety in colors and materials.
10. Consider the addition of a gateway feature, either an architectural element
or landscaping, at the entrance to the on -site boulevard off of Dalidio Drive.
11. A comprehensive signage program would return to the ARC at a later date.
12. The reuse of the existing 38 -foot tall lighting standards was supported.
13. General support for the layout of the site plan was given.
If you have questions, please contact Pam Ricci at (805) 781 -7168.
Sincerely,
Ro aid Whi nand
Development Review Manager
cc: Southern California, Ltd.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 1040
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Mutual Life Insurance Co. of NY
c/o Mony /Central Coast Mall
Attn: Yvonne Carrasco
321 Madonna Road
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
1-62
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 3
the laundry room. to front of building reducing size of garage east side.
3. Reduce the width of driveway 12 feet and increase landscaping around the buildings.
4. Provide more information on the architectural details — overhangs, roof eaves, planter boxes,
trellises, etc.
5. Reduce the mass of the building by eliminating square footage to be more in alignment of a
one - bedroom apartment. Possible suggestions include reducing the size of the garage and
other interior spaces as well as breaking up the roof mass (i.e. dormers) and wall planes (i.e.
offset garages).
AYES: Aiken, Stevenson, Loh, Parker, Illingworth, Rawson, Regier
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed.
2. ARC and ER 153 -98 321 Madonna Road: Environmental and architectural review of plans
to redevelop an existing mall by replacing 150,000 square feet of existing retail space, and
other site modification; C -R -PD zone; R.R.M Design Group, applicant.
Andrew Trachman of MBK introduced the applicant team; Yvonne Carasco, Gary Scott and
RRM representatives Vic Montgomery and Pat Blote.
Vic Montgomery described constraints with site development including overhead electrical
transmission towers, the City storm drain and the new driveway connection between Madonna
Plaza and the proposed Marketplace on the Dalidio property. He explained that providing the
new connector mandates reconfiguration of parking areas. He noted that proposed parking
numbers and ratios are proposed to satisfy existing site tenants (Gottschalks and hotel). He
stated that compact spaces are a small percentage of overall site parking (4 + 0/o). He noted that
tree wells provided a perpendicular tree pattern through the parking lot, allowing for a better
shade canopy for autos. He endorsed plans for head -in parking. He added that bicycle parking
requirements would be met and that a total of 38 motorcycle spaces would be provided.
1-63
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 4
Pat Blote described an overview of the planned architectural design. He discussed the
introduction of new materials such as red brick and architectural features such as awnings and
towers. He explained the proposed treatment along El Mercado with low wall, planting for
screening of loading areas and repetition or architectural forms used in Gottschalks and hotel.
He showed an overlay with changes to building elevations facing Dalidio Drive. He indicated
that these buildings would be moved back another 6 feet for a total of 16 feet. He noted that there
may be an opportunity to save some trees, but didn't know the specifics yet. He mentioned that
parking lot lighting standards would be reused.
Ron Whisenand advised the ARC that the level of lights at this center was found to be good on a
staff field trip with lighting experts.
Vic Montgomery explained the timeline for the project and requested final approval. He
indicated that he has worked with staff through this process.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Parker asked about the footprint for Building 6 - and proposed the idea of moving the
building to the opposite side of the boulevard from Pad 5.
Andrew Trachman explained his concerns with the suggested site plan change because of the
locations of power poles and the concerns of the hotel.
Commr. Loh followed up with the idea of creating a gateway appearance for the project from
Dalidio Drive. She suggested a cluster of trees or some architectural feature.
Cmmr. Stevenson asked Vic Montgomery about how the street connector could be included in
1-64
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2,1998
Page 5
plans and still keep most of the parking as it is.
Vic Montgomery explained that the parking lot would require grading anyway because the
pavement was failing in areas and that new buildings require all new utilities.
Commr. Loh expressed concern with the proximity of proposed buildings to Dalidio.
Commr. Regier asked about site lighting.
Pat Blote stated that existing fixtures were proposed to be reused.
Andy Trachman mentioned that some lighting near buildings will be reduced in scale.
Commr. Aiken stated the need for awning styles tailored for specific tenants.
Andrew Trachman noted that more specifics on awnings may return for review in the future
when specific tenants are known.
Commr. Illingworth questioned the treatment between hotel and Tenant Space B.
Vic Montgomery noted that Sheet 4 showed some of the site details proposed.
Commr. Loh expressed concern with proposed head -in parking. She noted that she liked the rest
of the parking lot with 90- degree parking stalls.
Commr. Parker questioned the possibility of the Gottschalk's loading area being relocated.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
1-65
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 6
Jim Lodes noted policies in the LUE to support integration strategies for Madonna retail
development. He described an alternative scheme of adding an anchor store and parking
structure. He discussed trends in the shopping center designs to create main streets. He found
fault with the project in terns of discouraging pedestrians. He felt that it was a mistake to have
backs of buildings facing City streets. He suggested looking at ways to modify the location of
the boulevard to keep more of the existing parking spaces and trees. He encouraged the
Commission to consider alternatives.
The public hearing was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. I11inQworth stated that he feels that we're trying to fix the existing project. He noted
concerns with the large number of trees being removed and with the backs of the buildings along
Dalidio Drive. He was interested in hearing other comments from the ARC.
Commr. Aiken explained the action of the Tree Committee and that the initial vote was
deadlocked. Ultimately, the Tree Committee approved proposed tree removals because of
superior design with better landscaping choices.
Commr. Illineworth stated that the 38 -foot height for the parking light standards was O.K.;
noting that the fewer standards the better with a larger parking lot.
Commr. Parker would like to see more vertical changes in the building forms. He is concerned
with the appearance of the outlying buildings near Dalidio Drive — make more fun and alive. He
would like to look at different trees along the pedestrian walkways and as a gateway to the
project.
Commr. Rawson stated that he would like to see more variety in the look of individual tenants
and give each space individual character. He liked the shops along the boulevard to encourage
1-66
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 7
pedestrians and provide services for shoppers. He felt that the back elevations on Dalidio needed
attention and that the outlying buildings needed more differentiation.
Commr. Regier stated that he could support schematic, but not final approval. He felt that the
parking lot changes would prove superior in the long -term. He indicated that he liked head -in
parking, but doesn't support compact spaces. He supported some of the previous comments
regarding architecture. He felt that the architecture is on the dull side and needs greater variation
and visual stimulation.
Commr. Loh indicated her main concern was the linkage between this site and the other centers.
She favored the idea of eliminating one of the towers at the shops along the boulevard and felt
that buildings farther from Dalidio. She agreed with adding a gateway statement along the
boulevard from Dalidio.
Commr. Stevenson stated that he was not prepared for the final tonight. He stated that shopping
centers should entice people to the site beyond just shopping. He suggested that El Mercado
should be used as a shopping street, rather than becoming an alley. He agreed with some of Mr.
Lopes' comments and site planning ideas. He wanted to look at adding recreation and
entertainment uses. He further indicated that all buildings are in need of unique character as
previously stated by Comm. Rawson. He stated that he cannot support the project as designed as
the plan doesn't lend itself to pedestrians. He noted that the mitigation for the air quality impacts
was not adequate.
Commr. Aiken stated that he wanted to see more individuality in building designs, noting that the
Dalidio buildings needed more articulation facing the street. He felt that more storefronts should
be incorporated into arches. He suggested that the applicant may want to consider some of Mr.
Lopes' comments.
1-67
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 8
Commr. Blingworth stated that we need to keep in mind the reality of the situation. He suggested
granting schematic approval with items to return to the ARC. He supported compact spaces
reduced in number with narrower pedestrian walkways; head -in parking with no wheel stops; at
least a 20 -foot setback of buildings along Dalidio Drive; support for the re-use of lighting
standards; and the buildings along Dalidio Drive designed to better address the street.
Commr. Stevenson stated that he looked at this meeting as a conceptual review for a project with
great public interest. He would like to see more public involvement in the review of such a
significant project.
Commr. Mingworth moved to support the content and conclusions of the Negative Declaration
with Mitigation Measures, and granted the project schematic approval with the following
direction regarding revisions to plans and additional information to be included in plans for final
architectural review:
The use of compact spaces along the two proposed pedestrian walkways through parking lots
could be justified because of their relatively small proportion of the total parking spaces
provided (4.3 %); however, the ARC would prefer eliminating them if possible.
Consideration may be given to narrowing the adjacent walkways to accommodate average
size car spaces.
2. The use of tree wells in rows of parking spaces, rather then landscaped fingers after every 6
spaces is acceptable.
3. The use of head -in parking spaces with no wheel stops along the main project access
driveway was supported.
4. Plans shall include bicycle parking in compliance with the requirements stipulated in Terry
Sanville's memo and a total of 38 motorcycle parking spaces.
5. Enliven the "alley" (boulevard) views of buildings by the addition of storefronts or display
cases in arched forms of walls.
6. Provide a more substantial setback of 20' to allow for denser planting along Dalidio Drive.
7. Tree removals were generally supported; however, the Commission asked the applicant to
look at saving trees if possible with the shift in the buildings closest to Dalidio Drive.
1-68
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 9
8. Pads 5 & 6 and Major E should be redesigned to better address the street ( Dalidio Drive).
9. Consider enlivening building elevations by providing individuality in designs and variety in
colors and materials.
10. Consider the addition of a gateway feature, either an architectural element or landscaping, at
the entrance to the on -site boulevard off of Dalidio Drive.
11. A comprehensive signage program would return to the ARC at a later date.
12. The reuse of the existing 38 -foot tall lighting standards was supported.
13. General support for the layout of the site plan was given.
Commr. Regier seconded the motion.
AYES: Aiken, Illingworth, Loh, Parker, Rawson, Regier
NOES: Stevenson
ABSENT:
The motion passed.
Commr. Regier left the meeting.
3. ARC 140-98 915 El Canitan: Environmental and architectural review of plans for eight
new single - family residences; R- 2 -PD -S zone; Kelly Gearhart, applicant.
Commr. Stevenson refrained from participating due to a potential conflict of interest.
Pam Ricci, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
Ron Whisenand explained the multi- tiered review of the project and need for a creek exception.
1 -69
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 10
Doug Davidson, Cannon & Assoc. described the project and introduced the architect, Bob Fisher.
He noted that the project design respected the creek and was compatible with development to the
north. He explained that Lots 5 -8 need creek setback exceptions; findings could be made for
unique circumstances. He stated that the staggered setbacks with the cul-de -sac provide more
interest He added that parking could not be added at the rear because of site constraints.
Bob Fisher stated that he could eliminate fascias and expose rafter trails, but was unclear of what
other embellishments to architecture that staff was looking for.
Commr. Aiken stated that he wanted to look at flipping the site plans to add more interest.
Doug Davidson explained that he had considered that, but was attempting to keep side yard
setbacks.
Commr. Parker asked if CC&Rs were proposed. Doug Davidson stated no.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commr. Parker stated he had concerns with the eucalyptus trees and their protection. He felt that
proposed architecture matches that across the street. He supported providing affordable housing.
Commr. Rawson had concerns with the setback from the units to creek. Shift buildings on Lots
1 -3 back further if possible. He likes architectural style of building. He would like to look at
different siding for some of the units. He would like to consider more than three colors and also
additional roof color.
Commr. Regier suggested that the units should be more unique architecturally. He felt that
proposed exceptions were O.K.
1 -70
DRAFT ARC Minutes
November 2, 1998
Page 11
Commr. Loh stated that there are too many exceptions proposed. She had concerns with the
density and would like to see the Planning Commission and the CC review the project first.
Commr. Aiken liked the architectural style of buildings, comparing them to a railroad/village. He
supported providing affordable housing. He suggested schematic approval for the building
designs and endorsed the creek setback. He stated that it is a tasteful development with creek
maintenance provisions built in. He would like.to look at alternative materials for borders or
trim.
Commr. Rawson moved for schematic approval with the following direction:
1. The applicant shall modify elevations to incorporate additional architectural features such as
wood gable details, vent ornamentation, decorative shutters and exposed rafter tails. In
addition, consideration shall be given to additional color schemes, different widths of siding,
and variety in roof materials and colors, to add more individual character to house designs.
2. Consider utilizing a variety in paving materials for the enclosed parking spaces to mitigate
aesthetic impacts created by the amount of ,paving in street yards. Specific suggestions
included having borders and trims of brick or tiles along with more traditional paving
surfaces.
3. To encourage more interaction among the residents, the proposed walkways shall go from the
front porch to the public sidewalk similar to the homes on the other side of El Capitan Way.
4. The applicant shall consider greater street yard setbacks of at least 14 -15 feet for Lots 1-4.
schematic approval with direction added to consider greater street setbacks of 15 foot for Lots
14.
The motion was seconded by Commr. Parker.
AYES: Aiken, Ellingworth, Parker, Rawson.
ABSTAINED: Loh, Stevenson (refrained from participation)
ABSENT: Regier
The motion passed.
1 -71
IN I: N4 I) L S I G N G R () U P
November 23, 1998
Mr. Ron Whisenand
Ms. Pam Ricci
San Luis Obispo Planning Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403
Re: ARC- 153 -98: 321 Madonna Road
Central Coast Mall Renovation
Response to ARC Comments
Dear Ron and Pam:
As representatives for MBK Southern California, Ltd. and MONY, we are submitting revised plans in
response to comments from the Architectural Review Commission meeting of November 2, 1998. To assist
you in your review of the plans, we are providing this letter as a Summary of Revisions and how they
correspond to the items on your letter dated November 6, 1998 (attached).
1. Compact spaces — we have analyzed the possible elimination of compact spaces and determined that this
would.cause the landscaping at the pedestrian links to be eliminated in order to maintain minimum ADA
clearances. On sheet 12 we have included an enlarged plan and section to clarify the design for the
ARC. We would like to maintain the compact spaces with landscape as previously submitted.
2. Tree wells — Tree well configuration in the parking fields was considered acceptable to the ARC and no
change is proposed.
3. Head -in parking — Parking configuration at storefronts was supported by the ARC and no change is
proposed. Two parking spaces have been eliminated in front of Major Tenant D to eliminate potential
traffic conflicts with main drive aisle.
Bicycle wnd r: btcrcyc:e parl:irb � Eicycle rack:.- havc been add°.,,a. adjacent to e:tu fc-. WE —major tenants.
Covered bike parking for employees . shall be provided by tenants as part of their lease agreement.
Additional motorcycle spaces were added to increase the total to 38. These revisions are reflected in the
revised parking summary on Sheet I (lower left of site plan).
5. Enlivened Alley Elevations —Alley Elevations are revised to include additional treatments that will
utilize storefront glass, display windows, or textured wall surfaces, as determined to meet the needs of
the future retail tenants. All of these options will be presented to the ARC with "overlays" at the next
hearing.
6. Dalidio Street setback — Building setbacks along Dalidio Drive had been increased to 18 feet. A six -foot
wide sidewalk has been added at back of curb as requested by Engineering Department. Connecting
walkways are added from pad buildings to new sidewalk. RECE[VEa
NOV 2 4 1998
U
O TA; U;S
Ty
nFy a2
opmvq
/00�/O�
Mr. Ron Whisenand/Ms. Pam Ricci
Page 2
November 23, 1998
7. Tree removal - RRM studied the existing trees along Dalidio Drive in terms of location, size, and
species, and determined that the majority of trees could not remain due proximity of the new sidewalk
and the potential for damage to their root systems caused by modification of existing berm. The few
trees that could be saved are not of a suitable species (pines and eucalyptus) according to the
recommendations of City Arborist.
8. Pads 5 and 6, Major E — Elevations of Pad Building and Major E are revised to reflect the theme of
varied forms, materials, tend colors. The designs are intended to provide a "vocabulary" of architectural
elements that could be interchanged to meet the needs of the future retail tenants, with review by
Planning Staff as minor modifications.
9. Enlivened Building Elevations — New Exterior Elevations (Sheets 7 thm 11) incorporate a variety of
forms, materials, and colors that are intended to enliven the project and create more interest for the
shopping environment.
10. Gateway Feature — This is still being studied and a design solution will be presented to staff early next
week.
11. Signage Program — Comprehensive sign program will be submitted under a separate application.
12. Light Poles — Existing parking light poles and fixtures will be re- located as shown on site plan Sheet 1.
13. Site Plan Layout — No changes are proposed to site circulation. Building locations are as originally
submitted, except increased setbacks for Major Tenant E and pad buildings 5 and 6.
Thanks again for your support in working through the details of such a complex project. We are looking
forward to the December 7t° ARC Meeting. Please call me (543 -1794) if we can provide any additional or
clarification to assist you in preparation of Staff Report to ARC.
Sinxr--ly
RRM DESIGN GROUP
qTAW
P t 40te
Architect / Project Manager
Att: Letter from City of SLO dated November 6, 1998
cc: Andy Trachman, MBK
Gary Scott., MBK
Bill Swackhamer, MBK
Vic Montgomery, RRM
Peter New, RRM
Z/A98001 /Govt/pb- Whisen=dRicci
1 -73
November 30, 1998
To: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner
Via: Jerry_Cenny, Supervising Civil Engineer
From: Mike Bertaccini, Engineering Assistant
Subject. 321 Madonna Road, Arc153 -98, Central Coast Mall Renovation
(RRM letter dated I1- 23 -98)
COMMENTS
This memo is in response to your request regarding the items circled in the attached letter
(Item #'s 2,3,6,7& 13).
Item #2 - Tree Wells
Acceptable. However, all tree wells within public street right -of -ways shall comply with the
most current edition of the City's Engineering Standards.
Item #3 - Head -in Parking
This parking arrangement is acceptable but not recommended. If installed as proposed, the
Public Works Department suggests that the 30' wide travel lane be delineated with street type
striping. This should improve driver awareness and keep the traffic channeled as far away from
the parked cars as possible.
Item #6 - Dalidio Street Setback
Acceptable. If the "Marketplace" project becomes a reality, then reconstruction of existing
road/sidewalk improvements will probably become necessary to accommodate the proposed
alignment of Prado Road. These changes will be conditions of the "Marketplace" project.
Item 47 - Tree Removal
There is not adequate information provided to make this determination. The planting of the
existing street trees was done to accommodate the future installation of a 6' wide sidewalk. The
applicant, therefore, must provide cross - sections at those location where they say the existing
street trees cannot be saved. The sections must show existing & finished grades as well as
accurate base elevations and locations of the existing trees.
Item # 13 - Site Plan Layout
Acceptable.
1 -74
e
AC
c.
0
4-
0
d
J
5
b
6
L
c
c
i
0
v
m
m
c
0
t
0
d
w
V
u
c
0
t
0
d
w
tn;
1
Q
r
Q
V
i
ff �
Z.
w,
1 -75
v,
N
W
W
c
O
O
d
r,
0
d
I tn
III
O
4-
d
t
dd
E
od
v rn
N L
� O
C
O c
J W
Z
00
1
W C
� t
� V
�1
� f�I
0 •-
Q
C
v
1 -76
v-
d� y
: ?i ;
M! "'I
O
C
O
O
d
W
}
d
d
s
a
0
i
7
v
v
v
4
!� 1
m
L
0
0
C
O
}
O
d
W
d
u
.4 i
ee
6 6
I 1
0
.Q
0
t
0
d
w
d
Z
Q
Jr.
wC
J a
J �
h
O 5
L
� � 0
i , n
� Q N
O V
d
r
d Z c
¢ W H
1 -77
I�
i
�
p
ill
'I
fl"
I -
V
i
}
t
a
.4 i
ee
6 6
I 1
0
.Q
0
t
0
d
w
d
Z
Q
Jr.
wC
J a
J �
h
O 5
L
� � 0
i , n
� Q N
O V
d
r
d Z c
¢ W H
1 -77
0
0
d
t
O
L
e4
Y
6
D
D
L
2
C0
I
Q
0
Z
W
Q
F-
Q
0
V
N�
4Ld.
r
2
W
V
+S-
.:i
a
.c
0
H
.7
1 -78
L
E
LF:�3
O
b
i C w
L
0
i
f
c
Z
O
Q
O
Z
�O
J a.
J N
Q •-
0
O H
i V —
0
J_
L
V
H
1 -79
s S
"
,ilhI h
0 0 y
{IBC ip
I'
_
O
Q
d
}
_
O
L
LL
0
0 0
I•mm
a
d
�$ w
�e y
Tf
Y
s
6
'a
a ¢
w
O
O_
L-
0
O
elf ?;
i;
� y itl
2
0
H
Q
0
Z
LLJ
91
J
SQ
S
U)
Q
0
V
O
a
/N
A
O
N
D
N
1-80
1 101
ai 1
a `
..
t
C
O
L
U-
t.
v
0
a
0
0
d
w
t
C
O
L
1!
0
a
i
O
O
c
0
a
L
O
O
. =
�t �
l'�
i
a Iii
r =,
Z
O
P
Q
O
Z
W
N
J
J
Q
1=
A�
J�
i N
m
N
7
O
N
1-81
i/00'
IN K NI 1) L S I G N G R O U P
� ..,.. ..:. . 1'!.r.:: r. irk . l c;.�... .. r�.` ..:: r.�. rn %j . ,••Iri „ „� • i :rn „.�,rp:� �i •. L�., �.�. :
CENTRAL COAST MALL
Revitalization Project Description
August 20, 1998
1. BACKGROUND
The existing Central Coast Mall project was constructed in 1987. It is owned by the Mutual Life
Insurance Company of New York (MONY). The existing Gottschalks store and the existing hotel
are located on individual lots under separate ownership from the mall and the four existing "pad”
buildings. A reciprocal easement agreement is in place encumbering all of the property
accommodating shared access and parking facilities. The property consists of four primary
components: Gottschalks, Embassy Suites Hotel, the enclosed mall composed of smaller shop
spaces and four "pad” buildings located adjacent to Madonna Road. The approximate sizes of those
components are as follows:
• Gottschalks 78,000 s.f.
• Embassy Suites Hotel 63,067 s.f. / 196 rooms
• Enclosed Mall Shops 149,500 s.f.
• Four Existing "Pad” Buildings 30,600 s.f.
The project currently contains 1,312 parking spaces. The total site area of the project is 23.9 acres.
The project is a "Planned Development' and was approved by the Planning Commission, City
Architectural Review Commission and City Council in July 1984. The "Planned Development'
approval addressed such matters as building size, heights, signage, parking ratios, site layout, major
tenant locations, etc.
At present, 82% of the enclosed mall is either vacant, donated to not - for - profit organizations, or
subject to month - to-month tenancies at substantially below market rental rates. Only 18% of the
enclosed mall is occupied subject to long -term lease agreements.
Despite continued leasing efforts during the past five years, the vacancy rate at the mall continues to
decline clearly indicating a need for a new direction in occupancy type.
2. PROJECT APPROACH AND OBJECTIVES
Approach
The proposed project seeks to revitalize the property by retaining and supporting successful
operations on the site and replacing the unsuccessful mall portion of the project. Gottschalks would
be retained and area is provided for expansion. The existing four "pad" buildings are retained in
current operation/condition. The hotel is retained and the existing hotel entry connection to the mall
is utilized as a new exterior entry. The mall will be demolished and replaced with new, larger
tenants and new facilities. New "pad" buildings are to be created separate from the main structures
to accommodate better opportunities for tenants to establish separate identity and parking
accessibility. The parking ratio is retained the same as the original Planned Development approval.
;. 1-82
%/00"
CENTRAL COAST MALL
Revitalization Project Description
Page 2
August 20, 1998
Objectives
A. Change the tenant composition.
B. Establish the property as a destination - shopping site by establishing additional "major"
tenants.
C. Reposition the project to accommodate tenants' contemporary store configurations.
D. Retain the character of the existing buildings (which will remain) while establishing an
updated, quality image.
E. Maintain the existing parking ratio.
F. Re -establish the value of the real estate asset.
3. PROJECT CIRCULATION FEATURES
There are several features of the new project which are aimed directly at the ability to attract new
major tenants. They make this property function better in conjunction with neighboring properties
and facilitate pedestrians and motorists on and off site.
Connection to Madonna Plaza — The new project includes a "boulevard" style access
connection directly to Madonna Plaza to facilitate "cross shopping ". It provides an opportunity
for pedestrians and vehicles to access Madonna Plaza via a direct connection near the existing
Sears store. The boulevard includes a landscaped median, tree -lined walkways on both sides,
decorative lighting, decorative paving, pedestrian benches, signage, and architectural elements to
draw shopper's attention to the connection point.
• Connection to Future Dalidio Project — The new project includes a provision for a future
connection to the Dalidio property for both pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed pedestrian /
vehicle connection provides a direct link between all three properties for shoppers.
• Connection between New "Pad" Buildings and the Major Tenants — Two new pedestrian
connections are provided connecting the pad tenants to the walkway along the front of the new
major tenants and Gotschalks. Pedestrians will be able to circulate between major tenants and
the new pads without walking down parking aisles.
• Maintain Parking Ratios and Provide for Accessibility — The project maintains the parking
ratio currently existing on the site and provides accessibility as needed to meet proposed
requirements. The parking area will be modified to be more efficient and re- surfaced as
necessary. Areas where the existing pavement is failing will be replaced. Landscaping lost
during reconstruction of the parking area will be replaced and enhanced.
1-83
/0�/O�
CENTRAL COAST MALL
Revitalisation Project Description
Page 3
August 20, 1998
4. OTHER PROJECT FEATURES
• Updated Architectural Design and Materials — Maintain a sense of belonging with the
remaining major buiidings by utilizing similar predominant shapes and scale. The new project
shall incorporate accent materials, new architectural features (decorative towers) and updated
color palettes. Design features incorporated in the new major tenant buildings are repeated at the
new pad tenant buildings to provide continuity.
Many of the materials used in the new construction will be the same or similar to the existing
buildings which will remain on site. The color will be complimentary to the existing buildings.
Visible roof areas are tiles to match the existing buildings. Accent materials will be brick
(although in a different color). Trellises, similar to the existing trellises, are used as accents and
to reduce the scale of the buildings. However, the detailing and color may vary from the existing
trellises.
The base of the new buildings will be plaster or masonry (although not the slump block used on
the existing buildings).
• Tenant Variety — The project provides for a variety of tenants ranging in size from the
Gottschalks expansion of approximately 30,000 square feet to smaller "shop" tenants throughout
the project.
• Signage — Updated signage will be proposed to give identification to the project and to the new
tenants. New signage will occur along Dalidio Drive, at the new connection to El Mercado and
on the new buildings. Signage on the buildings is proposed to be submitted for separate ARC
review in order to accommodate signage input from tenants after the owner has received
commitments.
5. SUMMARY
The revitalization project seeks to upgrade the property both in its value to the community of San
Luis Obispo as a shopping venue and its market value.
• The demolition of the existing mall portion of the property and reconstruction to accommodate
additional major tenants presents the best opportunity for long -term revitalization.
• The design seeks to be in harmony with the existing buildings that will remain without merely
copying them.
• Based upon the strong and clear direction of City staff, the project will provide a link for all
forms of transportation pedestrians, bikes, and vehicles to connect from this site to the Madonna
Plaza site and the Dalidio site.
v /a98001 \projectsummary\vm- Prjrkscript
1-84
CENTRAL COAST MALL RENOVATION R R M D EHis
s a n I u i s obLspo
d v '1
Central Coast Mall Renovation
Site Lighting Design Criteria
The following design criteria has been proposed by Lighting Engineers to provide appropriate
lighting levels on different areas of the site:
Area; Parking Lots
Fixture type; "cut -off' type parking lot lights (re -use existing fixtures)
pole -mount (re-use existing poles 38' max height)
Light level; average 1 -2 foot candles
Area; Pedestrian Pathways through parking lots
Fixture type; globe lights (re-use existing fixtures)
pole -mount (existing poles 20" max height)
Light level; average 45 foot candles
Area; Storefront Walkways
Fixture type; down - lights or "cut -off' type wall packs
Surface wall -mount (16' high max)
Light level; average 10 -20 foot candles
Area; Storefronts Entries
Fixture type; downlights
Soffit -mount (16' high max)
Light level; average 20 -30 foot candles
1-86
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 14, 1998
To: Pam Ricci, Associate Planner
From: Jerry Kenny, Supervising Civil Engineer (�
Subject: Central Coast Mall Redevelopment- 321 adonna Rd. (ER, ARC 153 -98)
COMMENTS
The street right -of -way line is 3 ft. behind the curb face along El Mercado. Construction
details of the alternative paving and materials are subject to approval by the Director of
Public Works. The City shall not be responsible for repair or replacement of any decorative
pavement other than standard asphalt concrete. The developer shall be responsible for
replacement of any damaged non - typical gray concrete.
2. Dalidio Dr. is currently a private St. southerly of the main Dalidio Dr. mall entrance near the
Post Office. The remainder is offered for public street purposes, but not yet accepted by the
City until completion of the street and additional right -of -way from the adjacent property
owner. An easement exists for the maintenance of the existing public water main and public
utilities. Standard 6 ft. sidewalk shall be constructed along this frontage with the project,
unless a postponement or waiver is approved by the Public Works Director as a result of an
approved realignment of Dalidio Dr. in conjunction with the proposed "Market Place"
project.
3. Street trees along El Mercado and Dalidio Dr. (Prado Rd) frontages shall meet City standards
as to size and species to the satisfaction of the City Arborist, with consideration for existing
utilities.
4. The City Arborist will allow the removal of most of the existing trees without conditions.
However, about 8 -10 of the existing Oak trees must be removed and replanted at Laguna
Lake Park. Removal shall be accomplished using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory
work under the direct supervision of a certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated to an
area at Laguna Lake Park designated by the City Arborist and the site shall be prepared to
receive said trees as directed by the City Arborist.
5. The existing flood zone must be plotted on the plans as denoted on the grading plan for the
existing plaza. Satellite building pads #6 and Major E may need to be raised above the 100 -
yr storm water surface elevation.
1 -87
6. The existing monument sign facing Highway 101 maybe impacted in the future by the Hwy
101 SB off -ramp.
Since the proposed project has a net decrease in floor area and the use is the same, there are
no adverse traffic impacts associated with the project.
8. There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly driveways)
that serve the existing mall development. Drainage from the modified parking lot, driveways
and buildings must conform to the existing pattern or modified as needed, to the satisfaction
of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Any proposed changes
must consider any resulting changes in the 100 -year floodplain. (See 5. above)
DevRev\ ... \Madonna\Central Coast Mall remodel
1-88
September 18, 1998
TO: Jerry Kenny, Supervising Civil Engineer
FROM: Terry Sanville, Principal TransportationPlanner
SUBJECT: Central Coast Mall Renovation -L'
1. Bike racks are placed at various locations throughout the site. Locations that are close to the
main entries to the buildings are appropriate while those remote from building entrances, such
as those associated with Building Pads 5 and 6 and Major Tenant E, are not. These racks
should be relocated.
2. Bike racks should be placed close to the entrances of Major Tenants B, C and D and the
adjoining "Shops" space.
3. Bicycle lockers or lockable rooms reserved for bicycle storage should be provided for all
clusters of buildings. For example, the lockers shown close to the hotel can serve employees of
Major Tenants Band C. Ina similar madW, lockers should be provided to serve Major Tenant
A and D and the existing major tenant. On the opposite side of the parking lot, lockers should
be located to serve Major Tenant E and uses on Pads 5 and 6.
4. Bicycle racks should be of the inverted "U" or similar design and meet design criteria specified
in the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. The number of bicycle racks and bicycle lockers
provided shall meet standards specified in the Bike Plan (reference Figure #6, page 14).
L\ Everyonc\ DevclopmcntReviewDivision \CcmralCoastMall Reno
1 -89
7
7
r•
(A
5.
The City will pursue Federal and State grant programs that can provide funding for
bicycle parking.
The Public Works Department will periodically review the need for additional downtown
bicycle parking facilities, seeking input from the BIA and affected businesses.
6. The Public Works Department will maintain a library of vendor information on bicycle
racks and lockers and will assist developers with the selection and location of bicycle
parking facilities.
14
1 -90
To:
Mike Bertaccini, Development Review
From:
Dan Gilmore, Utilities Engineer
Date:
September 30, 1998
Subject:
Central Coast Mall Renovation
Code Requirements
A water allocation may be required, due to the additional units. Currently, a water allocation can
only be obtained through the water retrofit program. The City's Water Conservation division can
help in determining the needed allocation and the necessary number of retrofits. Water
Conservation can be reached by calling 781 -7258.
If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized, Water and
Wastewater Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an allocation through retrofit
could offset a portion of the required Water Impact Fee according to appropriate City policies.
The project will receive a credit for any water meters that are no longer needed and are
subsequently removed.
The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the City can make
a determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure. If it is discovered that an
offsite deficiency exists, the owner will be required to mitigate the deficiency as a part of the
overall project. It is already known that the Laguna Lift Station is beyond capacity. However,
the City expects to have a replacement lift station with adequate capacity constructed by 2001.
Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oil/sand separators or other
wastewater pre - treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste Coordinator,
Dale Karns, at 781 -7425.
1 -91
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ron Whisenand, Pam Ricci, Community Development Department
FROM: Spencer Meyer, Fire Department
SUBJECT: Central Coast Mall ER, ARC 153 -98
DATE: September 23, 1998
ACCESS:
Proposed accesses shall comply with all San Luis Obispo Fire Department's Development Guidelines.
With reference to the scope of the proposed project, emergency fire access will be required along the
front and rear of the complex.
Where minimum required fire access width is provided, curbs shall be painted red with appropriate
signage installed to prohibit parking.
Public distribution mains appear adequate to serve the proposed land - use(s). New distribution mains
shall be capable of supplying the required fire -flows for the proposed land -use. Private fire mains will
have to be looped per NFPA 24.
HYDRANT LOCATIONS:
Publiclprivate hydrant density shall be per San Luis Obispo Fire Department Development Guidelines.
Fire hydrants shall be capable of supplying the required fire -flows (placement shall be determined by
the Fire Department).
It should be noted that Prado/Dalidio shall be considered a Major Roadway; fire hydrants on opposing
sides of the roadways may not be used when determining required fire hydrant densities.
GENERAL NOTES:
If/when additional traffic controls are required; Opticom systems shall be installed.
All existing fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire hydrant systems, fire protection systems and
appliances shall be modified to address the requirements of proposed occupancies.
Plan scale lacks the detail to definitively assess of all required life -safety and fire protection needs.
cc:
Jerry Kenny, Engineering Department
Dan Gilmore, Public Utilities Department
1 -92
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Developmen' apartment Project Review 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
The City has received the following application and would like your comments.
oject Address
321 MADONNA Parcel p 053-012 -007
Date Printed: 09/10198
Application Number
153-0
Routed to: Transportation (1 copies)
Legal Description
CY SLO TR 1268 LT 7
Economic Dev. Mgr. ( 1 copies)
Zoning 1
C-R-PD Zoning 2
Cal Trans (1 copies)
(1 copies)
Property Owner
MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NY A NY CORP
Pam E (1 copies)
In Care Of
%MONY /CENTRAL COAST MALL
Building Reg. (1 copies)
Owner Address
ATTN:YVONNE CARRASCO
Fire Department ( 1 copies)
321 MADONNA RD STE 200
Street Trees (Pk. Fmn.) (1 copies)
Utilities (1 copies)
SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93405 -6545
Public Works (1 copies)
Applicant Name
RRM DESIGN GROUP Day Phone (805)5431794
Bob Bishop, Site Grading
Applicant Address
3701 SOUTH HIGUERA, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
Representative Name
MBK SOUTHER CALIF. LTD. Day Phone (310)789 -2233
Representative Address
1801 CENTURY PARK EAST SUITE 1040, LOS ANGELES, CA 9MU--
ER Analysis of environmental impacts of proposed project revisions First action date: 10/19!98 AR
ARC Redevelopment of existing mall by replacing 150,000 square feet of old retail First action date: 10/19/98 AR
space with new
Return with comments to PAM RICCI
-15- aq
by 09124/98
Resource Deftciencv Certification:
_:this project can be adequately accommodatec
without overloading the city's facilities and
resources. (Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
_This project cannot be accommodated because
of utility deficiencies explained here or attached.
(Municipal Code Chapter 2.44)
Signed
Date
Although not required, comments and conditions are encouraged to be sent to the above
planner via e-mail utilizing Microsoft Word format. 1 -93
SITE /GRADING MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 6, 1998
TO: Pam Ricci
FROM: Bob Bishop (Building Inspector)
SUBJECT: 321 Madonna (Central Coast Mall Revelopment)
1. Parked vehicles overhanging the interior walkways such as the one connecting pad 5 with
tenant space D shall not reduce the clear width of the walkway to less than 4 feet.
2. Compact stalls are proposed for the parking spaces along the interior walkways. The use of
an "average car" parking stall layout is based upon the idea that compact cars will be
disbursed amongst larger cars throughout the parking lot. It is not the intent of the parking
standards to mix average parking with compact parking because the resulting panting lot
will be designed primarily for smaller cars. With the current trend towards larger cars it is
important that compact parking be used for special circumstances such as tree preservation
or creek setback accommodation.
Parking stalls have been located facing the major tenant buildings along a main feeder
route. This arrangement will make it difficult to access these stalls without creating traffic
conflicts during heavy use. The parking along this route should be limited to disabled
access parking.
1 -94
San Luis Obispo County
Planning Department
County Planning Commission
Airport Land Use Commission
October 16, 1998
Community Development Dept. /Pam Ricci
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: CENTRAL COAST MALL /MONY
Thank you for referring the above project to the Airport Land Use Commission. I
apologize for the delay in responding to your referral. The proposed shopping
center expansion is a compatible use with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land
Use Plan. The proposed project would fall within the ALUP's Area 5 - Other Land
Between Runway Extensions.
Within the ALUP's Area 5, shopping centers are a compatible use. The ALUP
requires the following condition(s) for this project:
1. Provide an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of
San Luis Obispo, the County of San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Obispo
County Airport.
The Airport Land Use Commission asks to be notified again when the project's
draft EIR is.released to the public. The Commission may have additional comments
at that time.
Sincerely
Ted Bench
Airport Land Use Commission staff
1 -95
� I . city of s Luis oBispo
MENCA
990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
INITIAL STUDY ER 153 -98
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
Central Coast Mall Redevelopment Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Pam Ricci, Associate Planner
(805) 781 -7168
4. Project Location:
321 Madonna Road
San Luis Obispo, CA
(See Attached Vicinity Map)
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
MBK Southern California Limited
1801 Century Park East, Suite 1040
Los Angeles, CA 90067
6. General Plan Designation:
General Retail
7. Zoning:
C -R -PD; Retail Commercial with the Planned Development overlay
r 1 -96
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781 -7410.
8. Description of the Project:
An application has been filed by MBK Southern California Limited to
redevelop the existing Central Coast Mall site. The four outlying pad
buildings nearest Madonna Road, Gottschalks and the hotel would be
retained. The central portion of the mall would be demolished and replaced
with new construction to accommodate an expansion to Gottschalks, three
larger tenants (23,625 sq.ft.- 30,000 sq.ft.) and smaller shops (total of
5,000 sq.ft.). Three outlying pads are also proposed with varying building
sizes. The total square footage of the redeveloped site would be 255,497
sq.ft. (258,100 sq.ft. currently exist).
9. Project Entitlements Requested:
The applicant has applied for environmental and architectural review of
project plans.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
The project site includes approximately 24 acres and is developed with an
approximately 230,000 sq.ft. enclosed mall, four freestanding pad buildings
and parking lot areas with landscaping. The site is surrounded by Highway
101, Madonna Road, the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center and the
undeveloped Dalidio property.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing
approval, or participation agreement):
None.
2 1 -97
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse
effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the
project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees.
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment
of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
Land Use and Planning
X
Biological Resources
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
Aesthetics
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
Population and Housing
X
Energy and Mineral
X
Cultural Resources
I find that the proposed project May have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Resources
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at leas
one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable lega
standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially
•
Geological Problems
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
Hazards
1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ther
Recreation
•
Water
Noise
X
Mandatory Findings
of Significance
•
Air Quality
Public Services
•
Transportation and
Utilities and Service
Circulation
Systems
There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse
effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the
project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees.
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment
of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
X
attached sheets have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project May have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at leas
one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable lega
standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially
Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ther
3 1 -98
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have
been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided o
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impose
upon the proposed project.
October 12, 1998
Signat6re , Date
Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir.
Printed Name
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No
Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact
simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture
zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as
well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on
a project- specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination
is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they
reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier
Analysis," may be cross - referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to thetiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)
(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
4 1 -99
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1 X
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies 1 X
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 1 X
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land 1 X
uses?
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low- income or X
minority community)?
The project is the redevelopment of an already developed commercial site with the same type of retail uses.
Portions of existing buildings would be demolished and replaced with new construction. The reconfigured
project will result in a slight net loss of retail floor area, 2,000 square feet less than currently exists.
The project does not involve any changes in zoning that would potentially raise policy consistency issues.
However, the following excerpts from the Land Use Element are cited to reinforce the project's consistency
with the existing General Plan.
1. Land Use Element allE1
Policy: 3.1.6 Building Intensity
The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 3.0, except that downtown sites which receive
transfers of development credits for open space protection shall not exceed 4.0. The Zoning Regulations will
establish maximum building height and lot coverage, and minimum setbacks from streets and other property
lines, as well as procedures for exceptions to such standards in special circumstances. Architectural review
will determine a project's realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a
neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in General Retail districts, they shall not exceed 36 units per
acre. So long as the floor area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in
addition to nonresidential development on a site. (Seethe residential section for policies on density bonuses
for affordable housing.)
Conclusion: No impact.
The proposed building floor area to site area will remain virtually the same - a ratio of 0.20.
Commercial and Industrial Development
Policy: 3.7.10 Madonna Road Center
The City will investigate ways to encourage more intense commercial development within, and more cohesion
between, the existing shopping centers on Madonna Road.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
The applicant's proposal, which shows a new boulevard between proposed building pads to link the project
with the Madonna Plaza Shopping Center, is consistent with the intent of this policy. The boulevard will
improve circulation for both vehicles and pedestrians between shopping centers.
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
1 -100
Issues and Supporting Informatio,, zwurces
sources
Poten....Y Potentially
Less Than
No
X
4
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
4
Issues Unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 6
4
Incorporated
projections? 2 X
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area 1 X
or major infrastructure?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 1 1 1 1 1 1 X
Not significant.
The project is the redevelopment of an existing retail commercial site. Although many of the spaces in the
existing mall are not currently leased out, the mall in the past was for the most part fully leased and staffed.
Therefore, the project will not significantly affect the supply of City -wide housing since the bulk of positions
created will likely utilize existing residents as employees, rather than depend on large staffing demands from
out of the area. In conclusion, the use will not significantly increase population levels or create a demand for
new housing.
The proposed project will not displace existing housing as it is a commercially developed site that currently is
not habitated.
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture?
b) Seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
e) Landslides or mudflows?
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
g) Subsidence of the land?
h) Expansive soils?
i) Unique geologic or physical features?
3
X
4
X
4
X
X
4
X
X
5
X
4
X
I X
There are no known fault lines on site or in the immediate vicinity. However, the City of San Luis Obispo is in
Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California and strong ground shaking should be expected durin(
the life of proposed structures. Structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria
established in the Uniform Building Code.
The site lies in an area identified by the Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan as being in the "RL" zone,
Zone of Highest Liquefaction Potential. As defined in the Seismic Safety Element, "liquefaction involves a
sudden loss in strength of a saturated cohesionless soil (predominantly fine grain sand) which is caused by
shock or strain (such as an earthquake), and results in a temporary transformation of the soil to a fluid mass."
Liquefying layers near the surface can cause a sinking, "quicksand " -like effect. At lower levels, liquefying
layers can cause a slipping surface for layers above. Soils reports prepared for projects in the near vicinity of
the project site have also identified conditions - such as high ground water - that would require extensive
earthwork to provide suitable support for major structures.
Conclusion: Potentially significant issue unless mitigation incorporated.
1. Mitioation Measure:
Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety Element, a detailed soils engineering
report needs to be submitted at the time of building permit which considers special grading and construction
techniques necessary to address the potential for liquefaction and issues associated with expansive soils. It
shall identify the soil profile on site and provide site preparation recommendations to ensure against unstable
6 1 -101
Issues and Supporting Informatioi, �sjurces
Sources
Potent.. ., Potentially
Less Than
No
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues Unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 7
such as flooding?
Incorporated
X
soil conditions. Grading and building must be designed and performed in compliance with the soils engineerin
report.
4. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
X
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding?
6
X
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
X
oxygen or turbidity?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
X
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of. water
movements?
X
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
X
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through
substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability?
X
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
X
h) Impacts to groundwater quality?
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
X
Surface Drainage
Proposed development will not significantly change soil absorption rates or drainage patterns since the amount
of impervious surfaces (parking lots, buildings and other site improvements) will stay fairly constant with
redevelopment. Although proposed changes are not considered significant, the applicant will be required to
obtain a general construction activity storm water permit from the State Water Resources Control Board
because site redevelopment involves grading which will disturb 5 or more acres of land.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
Flooding Issues
A flood zone was plotted on a portion of the northwestern part of the project site on the grading plan for the
existing shopping center. Two of the proposed buildings, Major E and Pad 6, may be included in this flood
zone.
Conclusion: Potentially significant issue unless mitigation incorporated.
2. Mitigation Measure:
The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing shopping center shall be plotted on
working drawings submitted for a building permit for the redevelopment project. The finish floor of any
affected project buildings shall be raised to a minimum of one foot above the 100 -year storm water surface
elevation consistent with the City's Flood Damage Prevention Regulations.
5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation (Compliance
X
with APCD Environmental Guidelines)?
7,8
1 -102
Issues and Supporting Informatics.... -jurces
Sources
potent ,
potentially
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues
Unless
impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 8
Incorporated
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants 9 X
W Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? X
d) Create objectionable odors? X
Air quality impacts were previously evaluated in the Final EIR prepared for the original mall project in
November 1983. The conclusions were that the project would not. result in long -term impacts because of
improvements in emission standards for vehicles and more capture of retail leakage. The EIR did contain
mitigation measures for construction - related impacts.
The current project is the redevelopment of an existing retail commercial site. Although many of the spaces it
the existing mall are not currently leased out, the mall in the past was for the most part fully leased and
staffed. Therefore, it can be anticipated that the project will have similar impacts to existing development on
overall air quality. However, since the Final EIR for the original mall project was done, San Luis Obispo
County has become a non - attainment area for the State ozone and PM,o (fine particulate matter 10 microns of
less in diameter) air quality standards. Standard mitigation is recommended to reduce impacts resulting from
site redevelopment and construction activity.
Short-tens Impacts
During project construction, there will be increased levels of fugitive dust associated with construction and
grading activities, as well as construction emissions associated with heavy duty construction equipment.
Compliance with the dust management practices contained in Municipal Code Section 15.04.040 X. (Sec.
7004 (b)) will adequately mitigate short-term impacts. No further mitigation is necessary.
Long -term Impacts
The 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution
Control District (APCD) to meet that requirement. The CAP is a comprehensive planning document designed
to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use.
Land Use Element Policy 1. 18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan.
Motor vehicles account for about 40% of the precursor emissions responsible for ozone formation, and are
also a significant source of PM,,. Thus, a major requirement in the CAP is the implementation of
transportation control measures designed to reduce motor vehicle trips and miles traveled by local residents.
The following mitigation measures will encourage transportation alternatives to the single occupant vehicle
and make the project attractive to bicyclists and pedestrians.
3. Mitigation Measure:
The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site during the lunch hour; and
• extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles.
6. TRANSPORTATIONICIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? 6,10 X
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment))?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X
d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? X
8 1 -103
Issues and Supporting Informati(j... ,,farces
Sources
Poten. , Potentially
Less Than
No
Significant I Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues Unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 9
Incorporated
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? x
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (e.g. compatibility
with San Luis Obispo Co. Airport Land Use Plan)? 11 X
The proposal will modify the locations of building pads on the site, but will actually result in a decrease of
about 2,000 square feet in terms of the overall project floor area. Therefore, the Public Works Department
has concluded that surrounding area streets can adequately accommodate the anticipated vehicle trips that
project will generate.
The City uses "Level of Service' (LOS) as the primary criterion to judge the significance of impacts. LOS
provides a measurement of congestion levels and traffic delays ranging from LOS A which represents free
flowing traffic to LOS F which represents extreme congestion. The traffic analysis prepared for the DeVaul
Ranch project, located at the intersection of Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road, indicates that the ten
year intersection service levels (2008) at Madonna Road and El Mercado will be operating at LOS C. The
same report indicates that the intersection will be operating at LOS D with City build -out. The City's
Circulation Element establishes LOS D as the maximum acceptable level of congestion along routes other than
the Downtown where the desired maximum LOS is E.
Conclusion: Less than significant impact.
The traffic analysis prepared for the DeVaul Ranch project took into account existing development. Therefore
the project site as developed with the existing mall containing 258,000 square feet of retail floor area would
have been accounted for in this traffic analysis. Even with build -out, the Madonna Road and Ell Mercado
intersection will be operating at an acceptable LOS.
Compatibility with Airport Land Use Plan
The project site is located on the County of San Luis Obispo's Airport Land Use Plan map. The map divides
the territory it covers into areas which are based on their proximity or sensitivity to airport operations. The
project site is located in Area 5, Other Land between Runway Extensions. This area is defined as one which
has only a lesser degree of safety and /or noise consideration.
Shopping centers are considered a compatible use in Area 5. The City referred the application to the Coun
Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The following condition recommended by the Commission's staff is
reiterated here to serve as a mitigation measure:
4. Mitigation Measure:
In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land Use Plan, the property owner shall
grant an avigation easement for the benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San
Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation easement document available at the
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal affect:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals 12 X
or birds)?
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 6 X
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)? X
9 1 -104
Issues and Supporting Informatio„ . -)urces
sources
Potem. ., Potentially
Less Than
No
Significant I Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 10
Incorporated
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
Threatened or Rare
X
X
The site is no longer in a natural condition having been developed since the mid -1980s with the Central Co
Mall. The City's Informational Map Atlas indicates there are no sensitive plant or animal species on the site.
Existing Trees
A number of trees exist on the site in parking lot planters. With submitted plans for redevelopment of the site,
the entire parking lot will be re- graded and reconfigured. A plan has been submitted which shows the general
outline of existing vegetation in relationship to the proposed reconfigured layout. Virtually every tree in the area
of the redeveloped parking lot will be removed. Removal of these trees will change the number and diversity of
plant species on the site.
Conclusion: May be significant.
The City Arborist has reviewed project plans and does not object to removal of the bulk of proposed tree
removals. Some of the existing London Plane Plaranus acerifolia) trees are not particularly healthy and may be
removed without specific mitigation. However, the Coast Live Oak trees are considered more significant tree
specimens. Addition of trees on the site as indicated on the project landscaping plan will compensate for the I
of trees proposed to be removed.
5. Mitigation Measure:
Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into the project landscaping plan. When
proposed plans do not allow for the retention of existing trees, the applicant shall incorporate new trees into the
landscaping plan to compensate for trees removed to the approval of the Architectural Review Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees may be removed with the condition that they are replanted at nearby
Laguna Lake Park. Removal shall be accomplished using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory work
under the direct supervision of a certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated to an area at Laguna Lake
Park designated by the City Arborist and the site shall be prepared to receive said trees as directed by the
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESUUKt;"- vvouia me proposar.
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 13 X
b) Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful and X
inefficient manner? 13
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and X
the residents of the State?
The Energy Element states that, "New development will be encouraged to minimize the use of conventional
energy for space heating and cooling, water heating, and illumination by means of proper design and
orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure." The City implements energy
conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code which establishes energy conservation
standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Buildings proposed as part of this project must meet
those standards.
The City also implements energy conservation goals through its development review process. Project
designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional
10 1 -105
Issues and Supporting Informati(,.....,urces
sources
Poten, , Potentially
Less Than
No
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Proper building orientation and highly efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems;
Significant I Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues Unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 11
chemicals or radiation)?
Incorporated
energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying on mechanical systems to maintain
comfort. To avoid using non - renewable resources in an inefficient manner, the following standard mitigation
is included:
6. Mitigation Measure:
Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Proper building orientation and highly efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems;
• Energy - efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
X
chemicals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
X
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard?
X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass or trees?
X
There are no known hazardous substances located on this site and none are proposed to be used in
conjunction with the normal operations of the retail shops and restaurants. The site is identified in the City's
Safety Element, Natural Hazards Map, as having a low potential for wildland fires.
10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
14
X
b) Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as
defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise
14
X
Element?
Although impacted from two significant noise sources - Madonna Road and Highway 101, the proposed retail
commercial uses are not noise sensitive as designated by the Noise Element. The project will not result in
changes that will expose people to unacceptable noise levels.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection?
15
X
X
b) Police protection?
X
c) Schools?
X
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
X
e) Other governmental services?
Fire Protection - This project has been reviewed by the Fire Department staff. Comments received provide
standards for compliance with the Fire Code including a requirement for all existing automatic fire - sprinkler
systems, fire hydrant systems, fire protection systems and appliances to be modified to address the
requirements of the reconfigured project and proposed occupancies. These requirements will be addressed
through established City review processes such as architectural review and building permit. Therefore, no
further mitigation is required.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? X
11 1 -106
Issues and Supporting Information ,,.,urces
Sources
Potent._., Potentially
Less Than
No
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
Issues Unless
Impact
ER 153 -98
mitigation
Page 12
Incorporated
b) Communications systems? X
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? 16 X
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 17 X
e) Storm water drainage? 17 X
f) Solid waste disposal? 18 X
g) Local or regional water supplies? 19 X
This project has been reviewed by Utilities Department staff. In general, the project will not result in a grey
demand for services than existing development does. The following paragraphs analyze potential service
issues.
Water Treatment & Distribution Facilities
If additional water meters are needed or if any water meters need to be up- sized, Water and Wastewater
Impact Fees will be charged. The cost of developing an allocation through retrofit could offset a portion of
required Water Impact Fee according to appropriate City policies. The project will receive a credit for any
water meters that are no longer needed and are subsequently removed. These are code requirements, no
further mitigation is necessary.
Wastewater Treatment /Storrs Drainage
The owner's engineer shall submit wastewater generation calculations so that the City can make a
determination as to the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure. If it is discovered that an offsite deficiency
exists, the owner will be required to mitigate the deficiency as a part of the overall project. It is already
known that the Laguna Lift Station is beyond capacity. However, the City expects to have a replacement lift
station with adequate capacity constructed by 2001.
There are two existing oil separators in Dalidio Drive (adjacent to the 2 northerly driveways) that serve the
existing mall development. Drainage from the modified parking lot, driveways and buildings must conform to
the existing pattern or modified as needed, to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community
Development Departments. Any proposed changes must consider any resulting changes in the 100 -year
floodplain. Depending on occupancy, some buildings may need to have oil /sand separators or other
wastewater pre- treatment systems to the satisfaction of the City's Industrial Waste Coordinator Dale Karns.
Again, both of these issues are code requirements and can be handled through the review of working
drawings.
Solid Waste Disposai/Recytxng
Reducing the amount of waste generated and disposed of, and increasing the amount of waste that is
recycled, can extend the life of existing landfills, and reduce the need for expensive new sites or expansions
of existing sites. The San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority reports that per capi
disposal, from all sources, in the State of California is approximately 4 -5 pounds of waste per day. Cold
Canyon landfill, the primary disposal facility for the City of San Luis Obispo, is projected to reach itscapacity
around 201 B.
Policy:
:onsistent with requirements specified in AB939, the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element calls for
the diversion of 50% of all solid waste from landfills by January 1, 2000 through source reduction, recycling,
12 1 -107
Issues and Supporting Informatioi, .. ,surces
Sources
Poten.._,, Potentially
Less Than
No
7. Mitigation Measure:
To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or the Community Development Director,
prior to building permit issuance.
Issues Unless
Impact
Water Supplies
ER 153 -98
development. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. To
mitigation
of existing structures to save at least as much water annually as the projected demand, or otherwise satisfy
the requirements of the water allocation regulations through an approved method. Compliance with the
Page 13
effects of any potential increased water demand.
Incorporated
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
20
and composting activities.
Conclusion: Potentially significant unless mitigated.
Cumulatively, projects that do not provide for recycling in all phases of their construction and operation
prematurely reduce the capacity of landfills and result in the consumption of raw materials and resources
rather than reuse of recycled materials in the manufacture of new products.
7. Mitigation Measure:
To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
A. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for interior and exterior on -site recycling.
B. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded materials,
such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be
submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or the Community Development Director,
prior to building permit issuance.
C. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and decorative building components and in
surfacing wherever feasible.
Water Supplies
A water allocation may be required if the mix of new tenants results in increased water use over past
development. Currently, a water allocation can only be obtained through the water retrofit program. To
receive an allocation, the property owner will need to provide water offsets through retrofitting the plumbing
of existing structures to save at least as much water annually as the projected demand, or otherwise satisfy
the requirements of the water allocation regulations through an approved method. Compliance with the
provisions of the Water Allocation Regulations and the water impact fee program is adequate to mitigate the
effects of any potential increased water demand.
13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
20
X
X
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
X
c) Create light or glare?
On the Scenic Roadways Map in Appendix B of the Circulation Element, the segment of Highway 101,
between Madonna Road and Los Osos Valley Road, on which the project fronts, is designated as one of
moderate to high scenic value. Madonna Road, north of the site, is identified as being a road of moderate
scenic value. From these segments are views of Cerro San Luis, the Santa Lucia Foothills, and the Irish Hills.
The aesthetic concerns associated with site development will be addressed with the Architectural Review
Commission's review of plans. Proposed light standards shall be designed with light fixtures that direct light
downward and prevent light trespass onto adjacent properties. No further mitigation is required.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
7
X
7
X
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
X
c) Affect historical resources?
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
X
X
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
The previous EIR done for the mall stated that the site contained no recorded or observed archaeological
13 1 -108
Issues and Supporting Informatio., ,..Purees
Sources
Poten. .., Potentially
Less Than
No
8. Mitigation Measure:
If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or cultural materials,
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
recorded by a qualified archaeologist.
9. Mitigation Measure:
Issues
Impact
state and federal laws. A note concerning this requirement shall be included on the grading and construction
ER 153 -98
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
mitigation
Page 14
Incorporated
or other recreational facilities?
resources, but indicated that there is a minor potential for the existence of an undiscovered subsurface
archaeological site. The site was excavated and graded in the past with the development of the mall. It is
unlikely that the more minor work done with this project will result in any new archaeological or historical
discoveries. However, standard mitigation is included to halt grading and construction activities in case such
discoveries are made.
8. Mitigation Measure:
If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources, archaeological resources or cultural materials,
then construction activities which may affect them shall cease until the extent of the resource is determined
and appropriate protective measures are approved by the Community Development Director. The Community
Development Director shall be notified of the extent and location of discovered materials so that they may be
recorded by a qualified archaeologist.
9. Mitigation Measure:
If pre- historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native American monitor should be called in to
work with the archaeologist to document and remove the items. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with
state and federal laws. A note concerning this requirement shall be included on the grading and construction
plans for the project.
15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities?
X
I
X
3) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
Demand for additional park and recreation facilities is typically associated with new residential development.
16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
X
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Without mitigation, the project would have the potential for adverse impacts for all the issue areas checked in
the table on page 3.
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental
X
goals?
In this case, short- and long -term environmental goals are the same.
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
X
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)
-he impacts identified in this initial study are in general specific to this project and would not be categorized
es cumulatively significant.
14 1 -109
Issues and Supporting Informatit,.. _.,urces
sources
poten, . potentially
Less Than
No
3.
San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990.
Significant Significant
Significant
Impact
Los Osos Valley Assoc. v. City of SLO & soils reports for Toyota of SLO & Sunset Honda.
6.
Issues Unless
Impact
Final EIR for San Luis Obispo Mall, November 1983.
ER 153 -98
APCD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook ", August 1995.
mitigation
City of SLO Municipal Code Section 15.04.040 X. (Sec. 7004 (b)) - dust management practices.
10.
Page 15
11.
Incorporated
12.
City of San Luis Obispo Informational Map Atlas.
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, X
either directly or indirectly?
With incorporation of mitigation measures, the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts on
humans.
17. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)
(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
For the most part, environmental impacts associated with this project were included in this study, rather
than relying on previous analyses. However, as noted in the initial study some impacts associated with the
further development of the site were previously analyzed in the Final EIR for the San Luis Obispo Mail,
November 1983.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state
whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe
the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to
which they address site- specific conditions of the project.
Not applicable.
Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083: and 21087.
Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3,
21093, 321094, 21151; Sandstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988);Leonofff v.
Monterey Board of Suervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
18. SOURCE REFERENCES
1.
City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Element (LUE), April 1997.
2.
Final EIR for LUE /Circulation Element Updates with Appendices, August 1994.
3.
San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990.
4.
City of'San Luis Obispo Seismic Safety Element, July 1975.
5.
Los Osos Valley Assoc. v. City of SLO & soils reports for Toyota of SLO & Sunset Honda.
6.
Memorandum from Jerry Kenny dated 10- 14 -98.
7.
Final EIR for San Luis Obispo Mall, November 1983.
8.
APCD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook ", August 1995.
9.
City of SLO Municipal Code Section 15.04.040 X. (Sec. 7004 (b)) - dust management practices.
10.
DeVaul Ranch Traffic Impact Study, Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc., 2- 28 -98.
11.
County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Plan for SLO County Airport, December 1973.
12.
City of San Luis Obispo Informational Map Atlas.
13.
City of San Luis Obispo Energy Conservation Element, April 1981.
14.
City of San Luis Obispo Noise Element, May 1996.
15.
Memo from Spencer Meyer dated 9- 23 -98.
16.
City of San Luis Obispo Water & Wastewater Element, July 1996.
17.
Memo from Dan Gilmore of the City Utilities Department dated 9- 30 -98.
18.
City of San Luis Obispo Source Reduction and Recycling Element, Brown, Vence & Associates,
15 1 -110
16 1 -111
July 1994.
19.
City of SLO Water Allocation Regulations, June 1995.
20.
City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element, November 1994.
19. MMGATION MEASURES/MONI[TORING PROGRAM
1.
Mitigation Measure: Consistent with the recommendations included in the Seismic Safety
Element, a detailed soils engineering report needs to be submitted at the
time of building permit which considers special grading and construction
techniques necessary to address the potential for liquefaction and issues
associated with expansive soils. It shall identify the soil profile on site and
provide site preparation recommendations to ensure against unstable soil
conditions. Grading and building must be designed and performed in
compliance with the soils engineering report.
Monitoring Program: The Community Development Department staff will review plans in
conjunction with the soils engineering report through the building permit
plan check process.
2.
Mitigation Measure: The existing flood zone denoted on the grading plan for the existing
shopping center shall be plotted on working drawings submitted for a
building permit for the redevelopment project. The finish floor of any
affected project buildings shall be raised to a minimum of one foot above
the 100 -year storm water surface elevation consistent with the City's
Flood Damage Prevention Regulations.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
detailed plans submitted for building permit primarily by the Public Works
Department.
3.
Mitigation Measure: The project shall include:
• bicycle parking and locker facilities for employee use;
• outdoor employee rest area to encourage employees to stay on site
during the lunch hour; and
• extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative
emissions from automobiles.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit
primarily by the Public Works and Community Development Department
staffs.
4.
Mitigation Measure: In order to be consistent with the requirements of the County Airport Land
Use Plan, the property owner shall grant an avigation easement for the
benefit and protection of the City of San Luis Obispo, the County of San
Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo County Airport via an avigation
easement document available at the Community Development Department.
Monitoring Program: An avigation easement shall be recorded with the San Luis Obispo County
Clerk /Recorder's Office. Evidence of its filing shall be provided to planning
staff prior to issuance of a building permit for the project.
5.
Mitigation Measure: Where feasible, existing mature trees shall be retained and incorporated into
the project landscaping plan. Where proposed plans do not allow for the
retention of existing trees, the applicant shall incorporate new trees into the
landscaping plan to compensate for trees removed to the approval of the
Architectural Review Commission.
Several existing Coast Live Oak trees may be removed with the condition
that they are replanted at nearby Laguna Lake Park. Removal shall be
accomplished using a tree spade and all necessary preparatory work under
the direct supervision of a certified Arborist. The trees shall be relocated
16 1 -111
17 1 -112
to an area at Laguna Lake Park designated by the City Arborist and the site
shall be prepared to receive said trees as directed by the City Arborist.
Monitoring Program: The Architectural Review Commission will ultimately approve the project
landscaping plan. Community Development Department staff will:
coordinate with the City Arborist regarding the final landscaping plan
including relocation of the oaks to Laguna Lake Parlf and provide field
inspections to confirm that installation complies with plans.
6.
Mitigation Measure: Future site development shall incorporate the following as feasible:
• Skylights to maximize natural day lighting.
• Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation.
• Energy- efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
plans submitted for a building permit by the Community Development
Department staff.
7.
Mitgation Measure: To help reduce the waste stream generated by this project:
A. Future site development shall include convenient facilities for
interior and exterior on -site recycling.
B. Future construction projects shall include a solid waste recycling
plan for recycling discarded materials, such as concrete, sheetrock,
wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be
submitted for approval by the City's Solid Waste Coordinator or the
Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance.
C. Recycled- content materials shall be used in structural and
decorative building components and in surfacing wherever feasible.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
detailed plans submitted for architectural review and building permit
primarily by the Community Development Department staff.
8.
Mitgation Measure: If excavations encounter significant paleontological resources,
archaeological resources or cultural materials, then construction activities
which may affect them shall cease until the extent of the resource is
determined and appropriate protective measures are approved by the
Community Development Director. The Community Development Director
shall be notified of the extent and location of discovered materials so that
they may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
plans submitted for a building permit by the Community Development
Department staff and subsequent inspections.
9.
Mitgation Measure: If pre- historic Native American artifacts are encountered, a Native
American monitor should be called in to work with the archaeologist to
document and remove the items. Disposition of artifacts shall comply with
state and federal laws.
Monitoring Program: Compliance with this requirement shall be monitored through the review of
plans submitted for a building permit by the Community Development
Department staff.
17 1 -112
Chapter 17.62
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
Sections:
17.62.010
Preliminary development plan.
17.62.020
Actions of the Planning Commission.
17.62.030
Actions of the Council.
17.62.040
Required findings.
17.62.050
Requirement for development plan.
17.62.060
Final development plan.
17.62.070
Phasing.
17.62.080
Amendment of final development plan.
17.62.090
Revocation of PD zoning.
17.62.010 Preliminary development plan.
Application for planned development shall be made to
the Community Development Department and shall
consist of a preliminary development plan, to include:
A. A legal description of the total site involved;
B. A statement of the objectives to be achieved by
the planned development through the particular
approach to be used by the applicant;
C. A schedule indicating the approximate dates when
construction of the development or stages of the
development are to be started and completed;
D. A quantified description of the total number and
type of dwelling units, parcel sizes, coverage,
modified and natural open space, grading, residential
densities, and areas devoted to nonresidential uses;
E. Identification of portions of the development which
would otherwise require a variance, and reason for
the deviation from normal standards;
F. A site plan and supporting maps, drawn to a
suitable scale and clearly labeled, showing, if
applicable:
1. Existing site conditions, including contours,
vegetation and water courses;
2. Proposed lot designs;
3. Location and floor area of existing and proposed
buildings or outlines of areas within which buildings
may be located;
4. Location and size of all areas to be conveyed or
reserved as common open spaces or for public or
semipublic uses;
5. Existing and proposed circulation system of
arterial, collector, and local streets; off - street parking,
loading, and emergency access areas; points of
access to public rights -of -way; proposed ownership
of circulation routes;
6. Existing and proposed sidewalks and paths;
7. Existing and proposed utility systems, including
sanitary sewer, storm drainage, water, electricity, gas
and telephone;
8. A general landscape plan.
9. A general grading plan;
G. Information on land area adjacent to the proposed
development, indicating important relationships
between the proposal and surrounding land uses,
circulation systems, public facilities and natural
features;
H. Any additional information which may be required
by the director to evaluate the character and impact
of the planned development. (Ord. 941 - 1 (par
1982: prior code - 9204.4(A))
17.62.020 Actions of the Planning Commission.
After giving notice as provided in Section 17.70.030,
the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing
on the application. The Planning Commission may
approve, approve subject to certain modifications, or
deny the application. The decision of the Planning
Commission shall be in the form of a recommendation
to the Council and shall be rendered in writing,
stating all modifications or conditions to be reflected
in the final development plan. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part),
1982: prior code 9204.4(8))
17.62.030 Actions of the Council.
After giving notice as provided in Section 17.70.030,
the Council shall hold a public hearing on the
application and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission. The Council may approve, approve
subject to certain modifications, or deny the proposal.
The decision of the Council shall be rendered in
writing, stating all modifications or conditions to be
reflected in the final development plan. If it approve -
or conditionally approves the preliminary developme.
ATTACHMENT 6
1 -113
plan, the Council shall approve the rezoning and the
official zone map shall be amended to indicate
approval of the planned development. (Ord. 941 - 1
(part), 1982: prior code 9204.4(C))
17.62.040 Required findings.
A. To approve a planned development, the Planning
Commission and Council must find that it meets one
or more of the following criteria:
1. It provides facilities or amenities suited to a
particular occupancy group (such as the elderly or
families with children) which would not be feasible
under conventional zoning;
2. It transfers allowable development, within a
site, from areas of greater environmental sensitivity or
hazard to areas of less sensitivity or hazard;
3. It provides more affordable housing than
would be possible with conventional development;
4. Features of the particular design achieve the
intent of conventional standards (privacy, usable open
space, adequate parking, compatibility with
neighborhood character, and so on) as well as or
better than the standards themselves;
5. It incorporates features which result in
consumption of less materials, energy or water than
conventional development;
6. The proposed project provides exceptional
public benefits such as parking, open space,
landscaping, public art, and other special amenities
which would not be feasible under conventional
development standards.
B. In order to grant a 'density bonus° (as explained
in Section 17.50.030), the Commission and Council
must find that the proposed development satisfies at
least three of the five criteria set out in subsection A
of this section. The applicant shall provide a detailed
statement indicating how the development satisfies
the appropriate criteria set out in subsection A of this
section. The maximum density bonus is not
automatic. In determining the allowable bonus, the
Commission and Council shall assess the extent to
which these criteria are met.
C. To approve a planned development allowing large
professional office buildings which can include
multiple tenants but with no single tenant space less
than 2,500 square feet in the C -S or M zones, the
Planning Commission or Council must find that it
meets each of the criteria listed below. The following
types of office- related uses are prohibited in planned
developments approved for C -S and M zones: Banks,
real estate offices, financial institutions, medical
clinics and doctors' offices and lawyers' offices.
1. The project will be compatible with existint
and allowed land uses in the area.
2. The project's location or access arrangement
do not significantly direct traffic to use local or
collector streets in residential zones.
3. The project will provide adequate mitigation
to address potential impacts related to noise, light
and glare, and loss of privacy, among others,
imposed by commercial activities on nearby
residential areas, by using methods such as setbacks,
landscaping, berming and fencing.
4.. The project does not preclude industrial or
service - commercial uses in areas especially suited for
such uses when compared with offices.
5. The project does not create a shortage of C -S
and M zoned land available for service - commercial or
industrial development. (Ord. 1129 - 1 (part), 1988:
Ord. 1087 - 1 Ex. AM, 1987; Ord. 941 - 1 (part),
1982: prior code - 9204.40)
17.62.050 Requirement for development plan.
No land division may be undertaken and no
construction begun within an area zoned PD until a
final development plan has been approved. (Ord. 941
- 1 (part), 1982: prior code 9204.4(E)1
81
17.62.060 Final development plan.
A. Within six months of approval of conditional
approval of the development plan, the applicant shall
file with the Community Development Department a
final development plan. At his discretion and for
good cause, the Director may extend for six months
the period for filing.
B. The final development plan shall include those
items from Section 17.62.010 (Preliminary
development plan) which describe the proposal,
including division of land, type and location of all
buildings and improvements, and so on, but it need
not include information on existing conditions.
C. The Director shall review and take action on the
final development plan within 30 days of filing. He
shall approve it upon finding that it is in substantial
compliance with the preliminary development plan as
approved or modified by the Council. Upon approval
of the final development plan, the Director shall add
the number of the planned development to the official
zone map (for example, PD (9999)). Subsequently,
all grading, construction and landscaping shall coma-,
with the approved final development plan.
1 -114
D. The final development plan may consist of final
subdivision maps, building construction plans, grading
plans, and so on, that would normally be submitted in
the course of development, and need not be a
separate submittal. The Director shall determine the
extent to which any additional documentation of
development plans is required. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part),
1982: prior code - 9204.4(F))
17.62.070 Phasing.
If the construction of the planned development is to
occur in phases, the open space and common
facilities shall be developed and made available in
proportion to the number of dwelling units or
nonresidential floor area occupied during any given
stage. At no time during construction of the project
shall the density of developed land exceed the overall
density established in the final development plan.
(Ord. 941 - 1 (pan), 1982: prior code - 9204.4(G))
17.62.080 Amendment of final development plan.
A. Minor differences between the approved
development plan and construction plans may be
allowed by the Director.
B. Written requests for amendments to a final
development plan may be approved by the Planning
Commission after a public hearing, notice of which
has been given as provided in Section 17.70.030.
Amendments shall be limited to changes in the size
and position of buildings; the number, area or
configuration of lots; landscape treatment; phasing,
and the like.
C. Amendments may not include changes in
proposed use, overall density, or overall configuration
of the land uses and circulation features. Changes to
these aspects may be accomplished only by
reapplication and submittal of a new preliminary
development plan.
D. These procedures apply whether or not all or part
of the development has been built. (Ord. 941 - 1
(part), 1982: prior code 9204.4.(H))
17.62.090 Revocation of PD zoning.
If a final development plan is not carried out in tl
time specified in the development plan or within a..
approved extension period, the Planning Commission
and Council may remove the PD designation
according to the usual procedure for city- initiated
rezoning. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code
9204.4(1))
1 -115
4-
THE .
MONY
GROUP
William J. Swackhamer
Assistant Vice President —
Real Estate Investment
Management
January 19, 1999
Mayor Settle and Council Members
City of San Luis Obispo
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401 -3249
Re: Central Coast Mall
San Luis Obispo, California
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
I Life Insurance Company
ivu0 East Eastman Avenue
Suite 300
Denver, CO 80231
www.mony.com
303145 7600
303 369 6838 Fax
bswackha@mony.com
$a COUNCIL
15 CDD DIR
63 CAO
❑ FIN DIR
® ACAO
❑ FIRE CHIEF
JIM ATTORNEY
❑ PW DIR
iZI CLERKIORIG
❑ POLICE CHF
❑ MGMT TEAM
❑ REC DIR
r
❑ UTIL DIR
®
❑ PERS DIR
We are the owners of the Central Coast Mall. We acquired the property through foreclosure
from Bill Bird in December 1993. After considerable effort over the past five years in
attempting to revitalize the property as an enclosed mall, we have come to the unfortunate
conclusion that the project is not viable in its present "enclosed" format. Neither the department
stores necessary to a viable enclosed mall nor the enclosed mall specialty stores were willing to
commit to the project. The project is presently 80% vacant and is causing significant losses to
ourselves, the community and the City.
In December of 1997, we engaged MBK Real Estate Ltd. to work with us on the
repositioning/revitalization effort. It was determined that the only viable option for us to recoup
some of our investment, for the community to regain the benefit from a convenient shopping
experience, and for the City to recapture some of the sales tax bleed off to surrounding
communities, is the conversion of the project into an open air community center. This was a
very difficult decision for us to make given the enormous capital investment we have in the
enclosed mall.
In January of 1998, we met with the City staff including John Dunn, Ken Hampian, Arnold
Jonas, Ron Whisenand, and Diane Sheeley to discuss the status of the Central Coast Mall and our
willingness to make the significant investment required to revitalize the project. We introduced
our project'team including MBK Real Estate Ltd. and RRM Design Group. We were informed
that the required process would be a review by the Architectural Review Commission ( "ARC ").
We and our consultants then had numerous meetings with the City LiFfunlygmF
MONY Life Insurance Company is a member of The MONY Group.
°a3
rn
m
fZ
r
.p
:q M
rri T
Z
JAN 1 9 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Settle and Council -,Lembers
January 19, 1999
Page 2
Development Review Committee meetings on May 21, 1998 and October 1, 1998. We then
started the public hearing process with a Tree Committee hearing on October 26, 1998. The
project was then in a position to be presented to the ARC with a staff recommendation
supporting the project. We should add that in order to obtain staffs positive recommendation,
we went through not less than 18 site plans and elevation revisions. The project was then
presented to a publicly noticed public hearing of the ARC on November 2, 1998. At the
November 2nd ARC hearing further direction was given and we worked with staff and
resubmitted the project to the ARC. At the publicly noticed ARC public hearing of December 7,
1998, the project received approval with a six to one (6 to 1) vote.
An appeal was filed (on the December 17, 1998 deadline) questioning the process that the City
followed. Our consultants met with the City Attorney on January 5, 1999 and he stated that he
reviewed the appeal and confirmed that the City followed the appropriate process.
In an effort to attempt to understand the concerns and underlying basis for the appeal, our
consultants contacted both the appellant (Brian Christensen) and the other individual who had
written a letter to the City questioning the process (Richard Schmidt). Our consultants offered to
meet with these two individuals to determine what their specific concerns were which neither
party was willing to do. However, they did indicate that their primary concern was over the
process that the City followed and their perception that the project was "ram - rodded" through the
City without the public being aware of the project.
We would beg to differ... While the City was a pleasure to work with and professional
throughout the entire process, it has been twelve months since we first met with the City and we
and our consultants have had numerous meetings with City staff, two Development Review
Committee meetings, one Tree Committee hearing, and two publicly noticed Architectural
Review Commission hearings on this project.
Additionally, a number of newspaper articles have appeared in both the Telegraph Tribune and
the New Times referencing the proposed redevelopment of the project. During the various public
hearings, only one individual appeared with any concems about the project (neither the appellant
nor Mr. Schmidt attended any one of the three public hearings). We find it difficult to
understand how anyone could say that the project was "ram - rodded " through the City.
Given the fact that 12 months ago we met with the senior City Staff, informed them what we
were proposing, asked what the process was, and followed it, we don't know what else we could
be expected to do. Furthermore, how could we have known to follow a different process?
v
Mayor Settle and Council Members
January 19, 1999
Page 3
We humbly request that you support the City staff, deny the appeal, and allow the Central Coast
Mall to be revitalized.
Sincerely,
William'Swackhamer
MONY Life Insurance Company
Cc: Yvonne Borges
John Dunn
Ken Hampian
Arnold Jonas
Tom McCahill
Vic Montgomery
Pam Ricci
Gary Scott
Diane Sheeley
Andrew Trachman
Ron Whisenand
x . . � Flv0-,MA!
;C-
7; 79 -
Tv
M.iiv --4FZ� I
Tv
(,YiQ
1
A L,f
Al
' F
i
t
2
ti
1
<\ �.
b!
1 t�
W%- f I'
t
O
GOTTSCHALKS
7 RIVER PARK PLACE EAST
P.0 80X 28920
FRESNO. CA 93729
(55914344800
FAX 434 -4804
January 15, 1999
Mayor Allen Settle
and the City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401
RE: Central Coast Mall
Dear Mayor Settle and Council Members:
�z
EXECUTIVE OFFICES
Gottschalks has now been a part of the Central Coast Mall operating a full line department store
in San Luis Obispo for over 12 years. We have provided merchandise of quality and value to
shoppers, and look forward to doing so in the new millennium.
The Mall of which we are a part, has run its course, and a new concept is now planned by its
developers. We welcome that concept and believe that the remodeling and our expansion that is
planned will allow us to improve the services we offer to San Luis Obispo shoppers.
We urge your approval of the plan submitted by the developer for the Mall improvements. The
sooner approval occurs, the sooner a better and more complete offering of quality merchandise
can be presented in a newly remodeled and expanded store.
Joe Lev.
Chairma
FASHION DEPARTMENT STORES IN THE WEST SINCE 1904
A NYSE COMPANY
EMBASSY
SUITES'
January 18, 1999
Mayor Allen Settle
and the City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401
RE: Central Coast Mall
Dear Mayor Settle and Council Members:
`tom ✓�/ $ HOE
333 MA ONNA R OAD
SAN Luis OB6roCA 934o5
TEL BO.rs549-0B00
FAX Bas - 543 -SM
www.�bauy- n,i0o.mm
FOR RESMVAnONS CALL
1-800- EMBASSY
5,z,:W, � V&--kv
In November of 1994 Nesbitt Partners San Luis Obispo Venture, ltd. purchased the
Pacific Suites Hotel connected to Central Coast Mall. With an investment now of over
two million dollars in renovations the hotel has become a first class Embassy Suites.
Since 1994 we have watched the Central Coast Mall occupancy decrease to a point that
you have to walk from the Hotel over halfway down before you reach a retail tenant.
Guests constantly are inquiring of my staff and me "What is with the mall ? ".
Our hope that a decision would be made as soon as possible to see that the developer of
the Mall can move forward on their improvements so no longer it is called by our tourists
a "Ghost Mall".
John C. Conner
General Manager
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 he decision of
rendered on l 0
which consisted of the following (i.e., explain what you are appealing and the grounds
for submitting the a p al. U additional sh�ets as
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
on _
Name /Department
Appellant: �Q.'=Ipq�
Name/Title
�
t-) X13 QP�
(Date) n � (::�T
Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative:
Name/Title
For Official Use Only:
Calendared for /►Cl�.tZA -LA�
c: City Attorney
City Administrative Officer
Copy to the following department(s):
- /'O/� 1
An, /J1uatiu...l
Original in City Clerk's Office
Mailing Address (& Zip Code)
Date & Time Received:
ur C 1 iy 1998
I
I 5-t.¢z¢- C,,,,O-� - j-Vlj r 731 f