HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/19/1999, 5 - ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF JOHNSON AVENUE, BETWEEN BUCHON STREET AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD (UPRR) RIGHT OF WAYcouncil D°_
j acEnaa Report '=`�
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Director of Public Works WVM
Prepared by: Jerry Kenny, Supervising Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF JOHNSON AVENUE, BETWEEN
BUCHON STREET AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD (UPRR) RIGHT
OF WAY
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution abandoning a portion of Johnson Avenue, between
Buchon Street and the UPRR right of way, subject to reservation of easements and
conditions, as recommended.
DISCUSSION:
The Council adopted a "resolution of intention" [Resolution No. 8882 (1998 Series) -
Attachment 4] on December 15, 1998 setting the time and place of this hearing to consider the
abandonment of this portion of Johnson Avenue right of way. The December 15 City Council
agenda report [Attachment 5] included various staff issues and the Planning Commission's
recommendation for approval, subject to reservation of specific easements and a "common
driveway and maintenance agreement". (Planning Commission Resolution No. 5238 -98)
The required notices and posting have been completed, as prescribed in the Resolution of
Intention. The City Council must now receive any public testimony and then decide whether to
approve, modify or deny the abandonment.
Staff recommends that the existing unpaved access driveway to the two "rear parcels" be
improved to City standards, as a condition of abandonment. A separate concrete driveway
serves the garage at 1265 Buchon, but a "common ramp" serves both of these driveways, which
is in relatively poor shape. It also does not meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
wheelchair specifications regarding cross -fall. Therefore, a new City standard driveway ramp
should also be installed to meet the ADA requirement. These conditions are listed in the draft
Resolution of Abandonment to be met prior to recordation of this final abandonment resolution.
Ownership of the resulting abandoned right of way would accrue to the adjacent properties, at
right angles (90 °) to the right of way line. However, the entire abandonment area would be
subject to reservation of easements for public utilities, City sewer, water and storm drain
purposes. In addition, a 16 ft. wide "common access driveway" easement would be reserved,
along with a public pedestrian, bicycle and emergency access easement to accommodate a
connection to the proposed northerly extension of the railroad pedestrian and bicycle trail. The
existing small "non- conforming" parcels would gain more useable area and become more
conforming, with regard to City lot size requirements.
5 -1
COUNCIL AGENDA RErvRT - Johnson Avenue Final Abandonment
Page 2
Existing City regulations [per Resolution No. 5478 (1984 Series) Attachment 6], requires that
any abandonment conditions be met within one (1) year of its adoption, or, upon expiration of an
approved project or tentative subdivision map, which incorporate the abandonment. The final
abandonment resolution contains wording to this effect.
Responses have not yet been received from the various utility companies, although opposition to
the abandonment is not expected, since the abandonment is subject to reservation of the entire
area as a public utility easement.
This abandonment is categorically exempt from environmental review per City Environmental
Guidelines and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15301.
ALTERNATIVES:
Option 1: Conduct the public hearing and continue final action on abandonment until any
issues or other conditions deemed necessary by the City Council are completed
or otherwise resolved.
Option 2: Adopt a resolution to deny abandonment, if the Council finds that the right of
way is necessary for existing or future public street purposes. (Attachment 5)
CONCURRENCES:
The Planning Commission recommends this action. The Community Development Director and
City Attorney concur with the recommendation.
FISCAL EWPACT: None.
Attachments:
1 - Draft Resolution of Abandonment
2 - Draft Resolution to deny abandonment
3 - Vicinity Map
4 - Resolution No. 8882 (1998 Series)
5 - Council Agenda Report (December 15, 1998)
6 - Resolution No. 5478 (1984 Series)
I: /Council Agenda reports/CC Report - Johnson Ave. Final Abandonment
5 -2
Recording requested by
and when recorded mail to:
City Clerk
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A PORTION OF JOHNSON AVENUE,
BETWEEN BUCHON STREET AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF
WAY (FORMERLY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD R/W), IS UNNECESSARY FOR
PRESENT OR PROSPECTIVE PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AND ORDERING ITS
ABANDONMENT, SUBJECT TO RESERVATION OF SPECIFIC EASEMENTS AND
OTHER CONDITIONS.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. In accordance with the public hearing duly held on January 19, 1999, pursuant
to Section 8300 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code, this Council finds and
determines that a portion of Johnson Avenue, between Buchon Street and the Union Pacific
Railroad right of way (formerly Southern Pacific Railroad RNV), as described and shown on the
map marked Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein, is not necessary for present or
future public street purposes.
SECTION 2. This Council hereby orders the abandonment of said right -of -way subject to:
A. Reservation of an easement for public utilities, City sanitary sewer and water mains and
appurtenances and storm drainage purposes, over the entire abandonment area.
B. Reservation of an easement for public pedestrian and bicycle purposes, over that portion of
abandoned right of way, as depicted on the attached Exhibit "A ".
C. Recordation of a 16 ft. wide common driveway easement agreement which provides for
5 -3
Resolution No. (1999 Series)
Page Two
common driveway access in perpetuity to parcels formerly served by the right of way, to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
D. Installation of City standard driveway and new standard driveway ramp, to the satisfaction of
the Director of Public Works and Community Development Director.
E. Items C and D must be met within one (1) year of this date. Otherwise, this resolution will
expire and be null and void.
SECTION 3. Upon notification to the City Clerk by the Director of Public Works that the
conditions prescribed in Section 2 have been met, the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of
this Resolution of Abandonment, duly attested under the seal of the City, to be recorded in the
Office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder.
On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of .1999.
MAYOR Allen K. Settle
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK Lee Price
APP ED AS TO FORM:
4C CI -Y ATTORNEY Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
:/Council Agenda Reports/CC report - Johnson Avenue Final Abandonment
5 -4
EXHIBIT "A"
Sheet 1 of 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
JOHNSON AVENUE ABANDONMENT - BETWEEN BUCHON STREET
AND UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD R/W
That portion of Johnson Avenue (formerly Essex Street) as shown on the map of the
Central Addition to the City of San Luis Obispo, recorded in Book A of Maps at Page 55;
and a portion of the Deleissiguez Tract, as shown on that certain map recorded in Book A
of Maps at Page 95, in the office of the County Recorder, County of San Luis Obispo,
State of California, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the northeasterly comer of Lot 8, Block 21 of the aforesaid Central
Addition, southeasterly along the northeasterly line of said Lot 8 and its southeasterly
projection, also being the southwesterly right of way line of Johnson Avenue (formerly
Essex St.) a distance of 190 ft., more or less, to the northerly right of way line of Munoz
Street (Abandoned Street); THENCE, northeasterly along the said northerly right of way
line of Munoz Street a distance of 11.3 ft., more or less, to the northwesterly right of way
line of the Union Pacific Railroad (formerly Southern Pacific Railroad); THENCE,
northeasterly along said northwesterly right of way line a distance of 19.6 ft., more or
less, to a point distant 26 ft. northeasterly from the aforesaid southwesterly right of way
line of Johnson Avenue (measured at right angles); THENCE, northwesterly, parallel
with the southwesterly right of way line of Johnson Avenue a distance of 90.6 ft., more or
less, to a point distant 30 ft. from and on a radial bearing to, the present construction
centerline of Johnson Avenue (200 ft. radius) per the Johnson Avenue railroad underpass
plans on file in the Office of the San Luis Obispo City Engineer (City Engineering File #
4028 B), also being at the back of a 6 ft. wide sidewalk as it exists on this date;
THENCE, continuing northwesterly along a curve concave to the northeast, having a
radius of 230 ft. and concentric with the above - described centerline of Johnson Avenue,
an arc distance of 90.6 ft., more or less, to a point distant 10 ft. from the northeasterly
prolongation of the southeasterly right of way line of Buchon Street; THENCE, a
distance of 11.3 ft., more or less, to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
SUBJECT TO RESERVATION OF THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS:
The entire abandoned area is reserved to the various utility companies for public
utility purposes, City sanitary sewer and water mains, storm drains and appurtenances
and access to maintain, repair or reconstruct such facilities.
2. That portion of the abandonment lying northeasterly of a line distant 10 ft. from, and
parallel with, the southwesterly boundary of this abandonment for common driveway
purposes for the adjacent parcels and for public pedestrian, bicycle and emergency
vehicle access.
5 -5
in
oc I
l V
O
Y +'
� U
ED Z3
J pq Q
d I
QJ
U
PUE, SANITARY
'ATER & STORM
DRAIN
COMMON DRIVEVAY, PUBLIC
PEDEST AN & BICYCLE
EASEMENr.
TRACT BUUNDARY
MUNOZ ST.
ADANDONED
BUCHON
OF
Y
R =230'
L =90.2'
urb Line
V
'.I •N �np1,
90.6'
y; d.
r,
ST.
C,
0
Z
Q
Deleissequez Tract
AREA TO BE ABANDONED
A'
I"= 30'
V�
My Of EXHIBIT W SHEET 2 OF 2 0'
San LUIS owp0 Johnson Avenue Adandonment
Public works Department between Buchon $ Union Pacific Railroad RM/
955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93402
5 -6
RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A PORTION OF JOHNSON AVENUE,
BETWEEN BUCHON STREET AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF
WAY (FORMERLY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD R/W), IS NECESSARY FOR
PRESENT OR PROSPECTIVE PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES AND DENYING ITS
ABANDONMENT.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. In accordance with the public hearing duly held on January 19, 1999, pursuant
to Section 8300 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code, this Council finds and
determines that a portion of Johnson Avenue, between Buchon Street and the Union Pacific
Railroad right of way (formerly Southern Pacific Railroad RfW), as described and shown on the
map marked Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein, is necessary for present or
future public street purposes.
SECTION 2. This Council hereby denies abandonment of said right -of -way.
On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of .1999.
MAYOR Allen K. Settle
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY CLERK Lee Price CITY ATTORNEY Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
L/Council Agenda Reports/CC report - Johnson Avenue Final Abandommnt denial resolution
1177�t 47C,'L� 2 5 -7
\ = N
U� 4 -
c
Y =
` + O
O
kz
ILI
''+' = v
b :C aa'cfu Lu -m «nra
�1• aL.{{ Oi iRM
y � _ KK fA. ta0 M La
fO Q
JOHNSON
ISA
PF
MR2
,o
J i �. `•�.: ° .
y` f: s � 1 O �• ` O
i+ � p� r A, 4�,♦ . p S
o ' • 44 pv ,,'t p + O
o � Of% p .o
o �•� ,,�
o
is
^�Y• ` E�I�I�
a
VICINITY MAP /\ D NORTH
M2/1'�
3
A-
5-8
RESOLUTION NO.8882998 Series)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF
INTENTION TO ABANDON AN EXCESS PORTION OF THE JOHNSON
AVENUE RIGHT -OF -WAY BETWEEN BUCHON STREET AND THE
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY (ABAN 152 -98)
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission conducted a regular
public hearing on November 4, 1998, for the purpose of making a general plan determination and
formulating a recommendation to the City Council on a request to abandon a portion of the
Johnson Avenue right -of -way; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission found that the proposed right -of -way
abandonment was consistent with the City's General Plan, and recommended that the City
Council approve the abandonment, based on findings, and subject to conditions (Planning
Commission Resolution 5238 -98).
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Action - Intention to Abandon. It is the intention of the City of San Luis
Obispo to abandon an excess portion of the Johnson Avenue right -of -way between Buchon Street
and the Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way, as shown on the map marked Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, pursuant to Section 8300 et.seq. of the State of
California Streets and 11ighways Code, and that the abandonment shall be based on the following
findings, and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The proposed street abandonment is consistent with the Circulation Element of the general plan
because this segment of Johnson Street is not identified in the element as being necessary for
neighborhood circulation.
2. The portion of right -of -way to be abandoned is not needed for present or future street purposes.
3. The proposed street abandonment is categorically exempt from environmental review under
Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act
5 -9
�� R8882
8882
City Council resolutionNo. (1998 Series)
Page 2
Condition:
1. If the Council determines that all or a portion of any "excess" right of way should be
abandoned, appropriate easements will be reserved for access to the City's storm drainage
pump station, drainage facilities, public water & sewer, public & private utilities, public bike
and pedestrian purposes, along with a common driveway easement and maintenance
agreement over any portion needed for access to the adjacent southerly parcels. Specific
details will be determined during the abandonment process. No physical development would
be allowed within the easements, unless specifically approved by the City, on a case by case
basis.
SECTION 2. Availability of plans. Copies of the map showing the particulars of the
proposed abandonments are also on file in the office of the City Clerk, at 990 Palm Street
SECTION 3. Final action date. Tuesday, January 19, 1999, in the Council Chamber of
the City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California is the time and place set for hearing
all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed abandonment, which time is less than
fifteen (15) days from the passage of this resolution.
SECTION 4. Resolution publication. This resolution, together with the ayes and noes,
shall be published once in full at least ten (10) days before the public hearing on the proposed
street right -0f - -way abandonment, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated
in this city.
SECTION 5. Notification of abandonment The City Engineer shall post at least three
(3) notices of the proposed abandonments in prominent locations near the portion of the street
right -0f - -way to be abandoned at least fourteen (14) days before the date set for the hearing in
accordance with Section 8322 of the Streets and Highways Code.
88882
;u
City Council resolutionNo.8882(1998 Series)
Page 3
SECTION 6. Notice to utilities. The City Engineer shall notify utility companies
affected by the proposed abandonments within ten (10) days after adoption of the Resolution of
Intention in accordance with Section 8347 of the Streets and Highways code.
On motion of Vice Mayor Romero , seconded by
Council Member Schwartz
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Marx, Schwartz, Vice Mayor Romero,
NOES: and Mayor Settle
None
ABSENT: Council Member Ewan
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15th day of December, 1998.
Mayor Allen Settle
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED:
54
w
5 -11
88882
/• EX.
zmuoa sr.
6
EN17Rf AB"LiAIR&.17"
Agm To S6 M£%aRvEa
onom" ar4iN � UT /z /Ti6's.r
6AA"F-
1015 J004SoAl AVE. 1
I _ ,
1
I -y
PARKING
PARk'IF.* L A� -All
Exhibit "A"
d�
g
%o+,lC.9i1�b
1 lK5 JoN+. a Aojj AVE. I I
e
.t'
R v Attachment R8882
UFRR Page 1
A1AMPONMEMt of rl.A�tN��tf AYrt.� ��2 -9l�
A FOOM pN � F 1266 RVC µql $r /MARK roaxwm, ujavlA
Jo14NS014 AVE .
5 -12
council
agcnaa Report 1k.
C I T Y OF SAN L U IS O B I S P O
b
FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
Prepared By: John Shoals, Associate Planner 9
SUBJECT: Street Abandonment (ABAN 152 -98) - Consideration of a Planning Commission
recommendation to abandon an excess portion of the westerly 26 feet of the Johnson Avenue right -
of-way, located between Buchon Street and the Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way.
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Pass a Resolution of Intention to consider abandonment, and -set a public hearing for January 19,
1999.
DISCUSSION:
Situation
Mark Johnson and Ursula Bishop own the property at the southerly comer of Johnson Avenue and
Buchon Street (1265 Buchon Street). They would like to add a third bedroom to their existing'two-
bedroom residence. However, due to their lot's small size (4,500 square feet) and zoning (R -2),
their property does not meet the density standards needed for a third bedroom. In order to increase
their lot's size to obtain their desired density, the applicants are requesting an abandonment of the
excess portions of the Johnson Avenue right -of -way, which abuts their property. Generally, when
right -of -way is abandoned, unencumbered fee title reverts back to the adjacent property owner(s),
subject to title company certification and any necessary easements for utilities being obtained. If
the abandonment is approved, then the applicants would have additional land for their total lot area
to be used in density calculations. This would enable them to construct their desired home
addition.
In accordance with the California Streets & Highways Code, the Council action to abandon a
street must be taken at a public hearing which has been preceded by adoption of a Resolution of
Intention to consider abandonment.
Planning Commission Action:
The proposal to abandon the street right -of -way was reviewed by the City Planning Commission
on November 4, 1998. At that public hearing, the Planning Commission found the proposed
abandonment to be consistent with the City's General Plan, and recommended that the Council
adopt a Resolution of Intention and set a public hearing to consider the matter of final
abandonment. The attached draft resolution reflects conditions of approval recommended by the
Commission (also see attached 11 -4 -98 Planning Commission minutes).
5 -13
Council Agenda Report
ABAN 152 -98 (Johnson Street Abandonment)
Page 2
Data Summary
Applicants/PropertyOwners: Mark Johnson and Ursula Bishop
Representative: Louisa A. Kluver
Zoning of Adjacent Property: R -2 (Medium- DensityResidential)
General Plan Designation of Adjacent Property: Medium Density Residential
Environmental Status: Categorically exempt under Class 1, Existing Facilities (Section 1530 L(c)
of CEQA Guidelines).
Project Action Deadline: Not applicable.
Site Description
The site is a triangular - shaped area located on the southerly side of Johnson Avenue (Johnson
Avenue runs in a northwest- southeast direction) between Buchon Street and the Union Pacific
Railroad right -of -way, see vicinity map (Attachment 2). The site is an unpaved area which
provides access to three residential lots from a common driveway ramp. It contains a City storm
drainage pump station, a utility pole with guy wire anchors, fencing and a tree.
EVALUATION
In order to abandon the right -of -way, the City must find that it is not needed for present or future
public purposes such as street and utility improvements. The following issues were considered at
the Commission hearing in evaluating public need:
1. Future Circulation Needs:
The Planning Commission determined that the right -0f - -way was not needed for future street
improvements. The portion of the right -of -way proposed to be abandoned has not been used as a
public street since the realignment of Johnson Avenue under the Union Pacific Railroad bridge. The
City's Circulation Element does not plan for any future roadway improvements within the right-of-
way-
However, the Commission did determine that an easement needs to be reserved over the property
for future bikeway improvements. Specifically, the Railroad District Plan calls for the future
construction of a ramp (within the excess right -of -way) to provide access to a planned railroad
bikeway crossing.
2. Utilities:
A PG &E utility pole with guy wire anchors and a City -owned storm drainage pump station are
located within the Johnson Avenue right -of -way, but not in the portion of the right -of -way
proposed for abandonment. Since there is a possibility that other public utilities may exist within
the right -of -way proposed for abandonment, the application was referred to local utility companies
for their review and comment. Staff has not received any comments from the consulted utility
companies. However, prior to final action by the City Council on the proposed abandonment, local
5 -14
Council Agenda Report
ABAN 152 -98 (Johnson Street Abandonment)
Page 3
utility companies will again be notified and have another opportunity to comment on the
abandonment.
The Planning Commission recommended a condition that the abandonment be subject to the
dedication of easements to affected local utility companies. This condition insures that the utility
companies retain their rights to repair and service their existing facilities.
3. Disposition of Abandoned Right -0f - -way:
Chicago Title Insurance Company has prepared a lot book guarantee /title report verifying the
applicants' ownership of the land underlying the portion of the right -of -way proposed for
abandonment. If the abandonment proceeds, then the applicants would have unencumbered
ownership of the abandoned right -of -way. As previously mentioned, they would then be able to
use this additional land area in their density calculations which would enable them to pursue plans
for an addition to their house which includes a third bedroom.
OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The Public Works Department supports abandonment subject to reservation of a 16 -foot wide
easement to accommodate a link between a future bike and pedestrian trail from the Amtrak
station, northerly to Marsh Street. In addition, the Public Works notes that a drainage easement
needs to be reserved across the abandoned right -of -way for an existing stone drain and the
possibility of future drainage improvements.
FISCAL IMPACTS
With reservation of the appropriate easements (i.e., drainage, utilities and bikeway /pedestrian),
the fiscal impacts can be considered to be minimal. Staff has not attempted to calculate the
potential value of the easements or any future improvements. A more detailed analysis will be
provided at the subsequent public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may find that the right -of -way is needed for present or future public purposes, and
decide not to adopt a Resolution of Intention to consider abandonment, without providing a public
hearing. The Council can also continue action on the Resolution of Intention, with specific
direction to staff and the affected property owners regarding additional information required.
Attachments
Attachment 1 - Draft Resolution of Intention to Abandon
Attachment 2 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 3 - Map showing Area for Abandonment
Attachment 4 - Planning Commission Resolution and Minutes (11/4/98)
5 -15
Draft Resolution "A"
RESOLUTION NO. (1998 Series)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF
INTENTION TO ABANDON AN EXCESS PORTION OF THE JOHNSON
AVENUE RIGHT -OF -WAY BETWEEN BUCHON STREET AND THE
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY (ABAN 152 -98)
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Commission conducted a regular
public hearing on November 4, 1998, for the purpose of making a general plan determination and
formulating a recommendation to the City Council on a request to abandon a portion of the
Johnson Avenue right -of -way; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission found that the proposed right -of -way
abandonment was consistent with the City's General Plan, and recommended that the City
Council approve the abandonment, based on findings, and subject to conditions (Planning
Commission Resolution 5238 -98).
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Action - Intention to Abandon. It is the intention of the City of San Luis
Obispo to abandon an excess portion of the Johnson Avenue right -of -way between Buchon Street
and the Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way, as shown on the map marked Exhibit "A ", attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, pursuant to Section 8300 et.seq. of the State of
California Streets and Highways Code, and that the abandonment shall be based on the following
findings, and subject to the following conditions:
Findinas:
1. The proposed street abandonment is consistent with the Circulation Element of the general plan
because this segment of Johnson Street is not identified in the element as being necessary for
neighborhood circulation.
2. The portion of right -of -way to be abandoned is not needed for present or firture street purposes.
3. The proposed street abandonment is categorically exempt from environmental review under
Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
5 -16
City Council resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 2
Condition:
If the Council determines that all or a portion of any "excess" right of way should be
abandoned, appropriate easements will be reserved for access to the City's storm drainage
pump station, drainage facilities, public water & sewer, public & private utilities, public bike
and pedestrian purposes, along with a common driveway easement and maintenance
agreement over any portion needed for access to the adjacent southerly parcels. Specific
details will be determined during the abandonment process. No physical development would
be allowed within the easements, unless specifically approved by the City, on a case by case
basis.
SECTION 2. Availability of plans. Copies of the map showing the particulars of the
proposed abandonments are also on file in the office of the City Clerk, at 990 Palm Street.
SECTION 3. Final action date. Tuesday, January 19, 1999, in the Council Chamber of
the City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California is the time and place set for hearing
all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed abandonment, which time is less than
vw.rz�
fifteen (15) days from the passage of this resolution.
SECTION 4. Resolution publication. This resolution, together with the ayes and noes,
shall be published once in full at least ten (10) days before the public hearing on the proposed
street right -of -way abandonment, in the Telegram- Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated
in this city.
SECTION S. Notification of abandonment. The City Engineer shall post at least three
(3) notices of the proposed abandonments in prominent locations near the portion of the street
right -of -way to be abandoned at least fourteen (14) days before the date set for the hearing in
accordance with Section 8322 of the Streets and Highways Code.
5 -17
City Council resolution No. (1998 Series)
Page 3
SECTION 6. Notice to utilities. The City Engineer shall notify utility companies
affected by the proposed abandonments within ten (10) days after adoption of the Resolution of
Intention in accordance with Section 8347 of the Streets and Highways code.
On motion of
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 15' day of December, 1998.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price
....• •
City Attorney Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
5 -18
/-� 5X.
BLC40M Sr.
In
ENT7Rf ABAA1veK1Af .Vr
4RP4 To 86 �t'£�SER ✓6D
jdr llAr4f, cSEh/E.f,
JroRM v'7 olVi Ur /Lirlcs•F-
Q
k
R�
E
1
lvp'Ir5 Joukl6w JW6. 1
! -,I
1
:to' t !6'
1
I
Pat:KtNG 1 � �
PARK „� �a�
I
I
1
Exhibit "A"
.,J
d\
h -
3,
JKJS JoW5,oN AVE. 11.
ASAMPDNMFwMt of OPLAWN19 ApPt,* Jj)Q•9Z
A FORrION a F 1265 suc14out 5r /MAKK UMIAeOW
ZoliMScM AuE .
G 7 A
ATTACHMENT 2
av
•eC ice\ /j P _ - __. _ _ —__ ._.. ..
I \�
P F rnf
op
,v' ara
m\
O = ,
__ __ _ R 2
Q =� M0. {1.MIYC .im '�'1[C. ^'
'Oa \tiPm„ t .pit.)
✓'' .S S
'• - vOHN50 '4'5
v \ Ae
BEER
Ilk
ce-
Ape As,
,�Y� •Y`4, sJ, r„ - � � WnvICNN?MM' -Ki!', +,5•' +`+
QE 7 se
X10 i .J
r t
�. �,
~+ h
t O hAY / \bh
E[�Oe�
VICINITY MAP NORTH
I rl� 9b
O
5 -20
`�X.
Z. M.cf A9AAIPM1AfjFA17-
AREA To 8E i Ark= -Rv0P
F�i� 1�t/BL /C l,�ATE,P� cS.E1i/E.P�
JroRM ar4lV � UT /L
99
ASAMPONMSW of
A toKTIoN OF
JoiWoN AVE .
ATTAC�AMENT 3
In
IFLANN1146 Arno* logwg) t
126 5 RV C µOhl Sr/MARK Jol4mtom; UKWL4
5 -21
ATTACHMENT 4 / i 2 -I5' CC / �
SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 5238 -98
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on November 4, 1998 pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application
ABAN 152 -98, Mario Johnson and Ursula Bishop, applicants.
REQUEST REVIEWED:
ABAN 152 -98: Review of an abandonment of excess right -of -way for Johnson
Avenue at Buchon Street and the railroad tracks.
DESCRIPTION:
On file in the office of Community Development Department, City Hall.
GENERAL LOCATION:
1265 Buchon Street
WHEREAS, said Commission as a result of its inspections, investigations, and
studies made by itself, and in behalf of testimonies offered at said hearing has
established existence of the following circumstances:
1. The proposed street abandonment is consistent with the Circulation Element of the
general plan because this segment of Johnson Street is not identified in the element
as being necessary for neighborhood circulation.
2. The portion of right -of -way to be abandoned is not needed for present or future street
purposes.
3. The proposed street abandonment is categorically exempt from environmental review
under Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act.
5 -22
Resolution No. 5238 -98
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that A 147 -98 be approved and subject to the
following condition:
1. If the Council determines that all or a portion of any excess right of way should be
abandoned, appropriate easements will be reserved for access to the City's storm
drainage pump station, drainage facilities, public water & sewer, public & private
utilities, public bike and pedestrian purposes, along with a common driveway
easement and maintenance agreement over any portion needed for access to the
adjacent southerly parcels. Specific details will be determined during the
abandonment process. No physical development would be allowed within the
easements, unless specifically approved by the City, on a case by case basis.
The foregoing resolution was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of San
Luis Obispo upon the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Jeffrey, Howell -Marx, Ready, Whittlesey, and Senn
NOES:
None
REFRAIN:
Commissioners Ewan
ABSENT:
None
VACANT:
One
Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary
Planning Commission
5 -23
DRAFT
SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 4,1998
CALL TO ORDERIPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, November 4, 1998, in Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners John Ewan, Mary Whittlesey, Paul Ready, David
Jeffrey, Jan Howell Marx, and Chairman Charles Senn
Absent: One Vacant Seat
Staff Development Review Manager Ron Whisenand, Recording
Present Secretary Leaha Magee, Associate Planner Peggy Mandeville,
Principal Transportation Planner Terry Sanville, Community
Development Director Arnold Jonas, Natural Resources Manager
Neil Havlik, EIR Consultant for the City Dennis Castrillo, Fire Chief
Bob Neumann, Public Works Supervising Civil Engineer Jerry
Kenny, City Traffic Consultant Jim Daisa, Water Division Manager
Gary Henderson, Fire Marshall Darren Drake, Consulting Engineer
Brad Brickwell, and Assistant City Attorney Gilbert Trujillo.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
Due to the anticipated length of Item #1, the Commission agreed to hear Item #2
first.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no public comments.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2. 1265 Buchon Street: ABAN 152 -98: Request for a review of an
abandonment of excess right of way for Johnson Avenue at Buchon and the
railroad tracks; R -2 zone; Mark Johnson and Ursula Bishop, applicants.
5 -24
Commissioner Ewan refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of
interest.
Peggy Mandeville, Associate Planner presented the staff report and
recommended (1) finding that the right- of-way abandonment is consistent with
the General Plan and (2) forwarding a report to the City Council recommending
approval of the abandonment with findings and conditions.
Commissioner Marx asked where the right of way continues..
Development Review Manager Ron Whisenand stated it continues to the other
side of the railroad tracks. When the underpass was constructed, Johnson Ave.
was rerouted under the railroad tracks with a portion of the right of way.
Commissioner Jeffrey asked who would maintain the abandoned area.
Ron Whisenand replied maintenance would be left to the property owners.
Commissioner Marx asked if the footprint of the house would be the same after
the third bedroom is added.
Ron Whisenand believes the addition will go up rather than out.
There were no further comments /questions and the public comment period was
opened.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Louisa Kluver, project designer, explained her clients' desires to enlarge their
home. This abandonment will allow for the correct density calculation in the R -2
zone to allow for the bedroom addition. The applicants are willing to give up any
easements that go along with the abandonment.
Ursula Bishop, applicant, 1265 Buchon, stated she is very fond of her home and
the neighborhood and explained her need to expand the home to accommodate
her family. They will not change the front of the house and would like to make
sure conditions placed on the abandonment include landscaping.
Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was
closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Jeffrey asked for staffs recommendation on the abandonment
landscaping.
2
5 -25
Ron Whisenand stated the issue before the Commission is General Plan
conformity of the abandonment. There are a number of issues in terms of
common driveways, road improvements, etc., that will be reviewed /considered
as part of the City Council process.
Commissioner Ready asked how 1515 and 1525 Johnson Avenue will have
access to Johnson Avenue.
Ron Whisenand stated there will be a requirement for legal access. This will
also be addressed by the City Council.
Mr. Kenny, Public Works Supervising Civil Engineering, stated staffs
recommendation would be for Council to require improvements for the driveway
to meet city standards and reserve the right for the other two parcels to pass
over the portion that would accrue to the comer property at 1265 Buchon St.
Landscaping would be beyond the scope of a street abandonment.
Commissioner Jeffrey moved to find that the right -of -way abandonment is
consistent with the General Plan and forward a report to the City Council
recommending approval of the abandonment based on the findings and subiect
to the conditions contained in the staff report The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Ready.
AYES: Commissioners Jeffrey, Ready, Marx, Whittlesey, and Chairman
Senn
NOES: None
REFRAIN: Commissioner Ewan
The motion carried 5 -0-1. There is one vacant seat.
the imnmental impact report, annex, and prezone t 22 -acre site
(DeVaul Ra to allow for the future subdivision development of 35
acres with approxi ely 147 single - family 5Weings and 106 multifamily
dwellings, a three -acre paw.,and 184 a dedicated to the City as open
space.
At the Chairman's request, ggy Mandevlffleexplained the Commission's
charge, the applications ore the Commission, and114 General Plan language
controlling the sit Afterwards, she presented staff report and
recommended recommending to the City Council at the Final
Environme Impact Report (EIR) be certified, (B) recommendin the City
CoungwThat the lower 38 acres of the site be prezoned as R -1 (Low nsity
idential), PF (Public Facility), and the remaining 184 acres be prezone
3
5 -26
RESOLUTION N0. 5478 (1984 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS.OBISPO ESTABLISHING A SUNSET CLAUSE
FOR PENDING AND FUTURE STREET ABANDONMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. All pending street abandonments as shown on the attached "Exhibit
A" shall expire six (6) months from this date or upon expiration of a current
specific project or tentative subdivision approval which incorporates the respective
abandonment.
SECTION 2. All future street abandonment considerations shall expire one (1)
year after conditional approval by the Council or upon expiration of an approved
specific project or tentative subdivision which incorporates the abandonment.
On motion Councilman Settle , seconded by Councilman Griffin ,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Griffin, Dovey, Dunin and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 2nd day of October ,
1984.
ATTEST:
i
4
CI C ' K PAMELA V ES
k
5 -27
R 5478
c;Z-
�dminlstratlV ficer
CAa
141t, Zity Attorney
Communit Development Director
City E g neer
5 -28
October 2, 1984
EIMIBIT "A"
SUNSET CLAUSES FOR PENDING
STREET ABANDONMENTS
1. PACIFIC STREET (between Santa Rosa and Toro Streets adjacent to S.L. Creek)
Effective: until expiration of tentative M.S.83 -034.
2. FLORENCE, LEONA, HASKIN, WILLIAM STREETS (Terrace Hill)
Effective: until expiration of respective tentative tracts 926, 1034, 1064.
3. LELAND TERRACE, BUENA VISTA TERRACE (Terrace Hill area - Jack Farris)
Effective: for six (6) months unless a specific project or tentative subdivision
is approved in the interim which will then rum concurrently with such approval.
4. CHORRO /WALNUT STREETS (excess R /W)
Effective: for six (6) months unless a specific project or tentative subdivision
map is approved in the interim which will then run concurrently with such approval.
5. MONTALBAN /LEMON STREETS (excess R /W)
Effective: for six (6) months or upon notice by applicant unless a specific project
or tentative subdivision map is approved in the interim which will then run con-
currently with such approval.
6. MONTALBAN STREET (westerly of Santa Rosa Street, adjacent to Stenner Creek)
Effective: for six (6) months unless a specific project or tentative subdivision
map is approved in the interim which will then run concurrently with such approval.
7. BRIZZOLARA STREET (southerly end adjacent to Hwy 101)
Effective: until expiration of Minor Subdivision 82 -103.
5 -29
T
O
R
O
S
T
Housing (Rental Versus Owner Occupied) Pattern
Buchon St. - Johnson Avenue Area
��r9�9
Business Area
OWNER OWNER RENTAL
Duplex
RENTAL J RENTAURENTAL
O
RENTAL H OWNER
N RENTAL
Tri-Plex
RENTAL
S
RENTAL OWNER RENTAL OWNER RENTAL
RENTAL
I
RENTAL
O OWNER
N
Buchon St.
Multi -plex
P
A
RENTAL OWNER RENTAL RENTAL
E OWNER
OWNER
V RENTAL
N
E
N
N
RENTAL
Y OWNER
RENTAL
U
E
Tri -Plex
L
RENTAL
A RENTAL
RENTAL
RAILROAD
N
E
RAILROAD
Louisa
Anne
Kluver
January 19,1999
City Council
RE: #5
Johnson Ave. Abandonment
Dear Council Member,
MEETING AGENDA
DATE I'19'Q ITEM #=
NCDUNCII.
®CDD DIR
W CAO
O FIN DIR
M ACAO
O FIRE CHIEF
® ATTORNEY
0 PW DIR
jM CLERK/ORIO
O POLICE CHF
O U YT
O REC DIR
1�
O UTIL DIR
®
O PERS DIR
I wanted to articulate our concerns regarding the issue of the Johnson Ave.
Abandonment in writing, in case I forget a point or confuse the issue in my oral
presentation. The staff report did an excellent job articulating the reasons for this
request. My client's desire a three bedroom home. Unfortunately, with their
property being zoned R -2, the density calculation doesn't allow a third bedroom with
the size of their lot. They have a strong attachment to this neighborhood, so
decided to pursue this costly abandonment process to gain the square footage
needed.
Our concerns are in in regards to Section 2, C & D, the Improvements required
and the driveway easement. There will be 4 property owners who will benefit for this
action, including the city. A city pump house would be accessed through this
easement. Their neighbor, has totally ignored any communication we have taken to
ask for his participation. 5o unfortunately, my clients have fronted all the costs up
to this point, including the $1400.00 fee and my architecture fees. They are not
willing to invest anymore of their money for improvements which will have a minimum
benefit to their property.
In the best of situations, it will be hard to Oct 4 neighbors to work together in an
endeavor such as this. And, I understand the council's desire to make this a simple a
process. But, we would like the council to look at other options, than were presented
In the staff report. My clients would like the you to look at the possibility of only
abandoning the property in front their lot, and exclude any improvements. Or adopt
a resolution to include phasing in this abandonment. The final could be done in phases,
so the other neighbors could acluire their abandonment as they made the
Improvements which affect their individual properties. Also, my clients would like to
be excluded from the access easement. They would quick claim their email portion of
the drive required to accese the other 3 properties.
I know this is a complicated approach, but my clients feel they are being held
hostage to improvements which would have only a minimal benefit to their property.
Thank -you for your time.
RECEIVED
5iinnc)erely, JAN 19 1999
�a/
Lou Klwer SLO CITY CLERK
979 Owe Street Suite A -2 Sari Luis Obispo California 93401
17, X999
III! I ioiii ii�� i � �� � i i i
i
Utz
T
MR _ ., 1 0
J
January 18, 1999
Mayor Allen Settle
Council Members Ewan, Marx, Romero, Schwartz
900 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo. Califbmia 93401
Dear Mayor Settle and Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council:
1 am pleased to take this opportunity to support the home improvement plans
currently being drafted by Urusla Bishop and Mark Johnson at 1265 Buchon Street.
My property at 1251 Buchon Street runs the entire westem length of the
Bishop /Johnson lot. The remodeling design that Ms. Bishop and Dr. Johnson have
created will be an asset to the neighborhood. It is my sincere hope that you will do
all that you can to facilitate their efforts.
My wife and 1 have lived at our home for the past fifteen years. During this time
we have seen the rental properties that are adjacent to our home tum over time
and time again. Today, of the twelve residences in closest proximity to our
property, ten are renter occupied. This was also the case with the 1265 Buchon
residence prior to Ms. Bishop and Dr. Johnsoris purchase.
Clearly our neighborhood has changed during the course of the last two decades
from owner occupied residences to absent landowners. This is not a trivial matter.
The quality of property upkeep and sense of place that once characterized the
environment is at a fragile point.
It is my hope that Ms. Bishop and Dr. Johnson and their family will realize their
dream of living in old town. It would be a tragedy if this family left for the new
development of Edna -Islay and continued the pattern of family flight from the
Citys inner core. if the older sections of San Luis are to become vibrant once again
they will need renovation and cash investment. Ms. Bishop and Dr. Johnson are
willing to make this commitment. It would be my hope that you would support
their efforts in whatever way possible.
Sincerely Yours,
Stephan R Lamb
1251 Buchon Street
San Luis Obispo, Califomia 93401
A*
RICHARD SCHMIDT
January 19, 1999
Re: Central Coast Mall Appeal
To the City Council:
PrMNG AGENDA
L. c ITEM #
112 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 544 -4247
0 COUNCIL
; CDD DIR
;Q CAO
❑ FIN CM
A ACAO
❑ FIRE CliIEF
» A'i iOFNEY
❑ PW DIR
.td CLERKIORIG
❑ POLICE CliF
❑ TEAM
❑ RTC DIR
YT
❑ DIR
$ �i�tr Ogee
❑ PERS DIR 3
e -mail: rschmidt @calpoly.edu
Due to other commitments, it is doubtful I can attend tonight's hearing, and tnerefore I submit brief comments via
this letter.
I urge you to uphold the appeal, and to send this project through the legally - established Planned
Development approval process.
The demolition of an arguably attractive and potentially functional 12- year -old enclosed pedestrian - friendly general
retail mall is a crazy way to "fix" its market- driven problems, and its replacement with freestanding strip mall
buildings simply makes our city more like Santa Maria or Salinas, or any other Nowhereville freeway stop, and less
like the unique and charactertul San Luis Obispo our citizens and our planning documents say we want and intend
to preserve and promote.
These are issues of serious public import, and there has been no meaningful opportunity for the public to
participate in discussing them, for the ARC doesn't engage in such deliberations. Its concerns are limited, and it is
concerned mainly with esthetics. At the time of approval, the ARC's chair made this point to the press, which
reported the following day: "Jim Aiken, Architectural Review Commission chairman, said Monday that it wasn't the
commission's responsibility to judge whether the proposal would help the mall recover. 'You have to give the
developers the benefit of the doubt. They are the ones sinking millions into the development,' Aiken said." (Trib,
Dec. 8)
The legally - prescribed planned development approval process, on the other hand, promotes full public discussion
of the community's concerns about such a huge project and its long -range impact upon the entire community.
call your attention to the following points:
1. The "approval" of the mall demolition and rebuild by the ARC is clearly unlawful. My letter to you of Dec. 8, 1998,
(which is attached) cites the pertinent ordinance sections. The ordinance states that changes to approved PD
zoned sites SHALL be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Nowhere does the ordinance
mention the ARC. Clearly, the ARC is not an agency of competent jurisdiction in this matter, and its "approval" is
therefore legally irrelevant.
2. 1 remain concerned by the incremental augmentation of ARC authority by staff, and the corresponding diminution
of Planning Commission and City Council development review authority and involvement -- a trend of which this
project's handling to date is a symptom. The ARC was established as a design review body. not to be the ultimate
arbiter of matters pertaining to the General Plan, the zoning code. the planned development ordinance. CEQA. or
other lap nning matters now routinely being routed their way by staff. The ARC was never intended to be the agency
of competent jurisdiction in such matters. Council needs to get planning decisions back into the hands of the
Planning Commission and City Council, where they belong, and where citizens expect to find them.
3. 1 also remain concerned by staff's being permitted to "interpret" existing ordinances in ways the Council never
intended when enacting those ordinances. The "interpretation" which turns the PD ordinance on its nose in the
present case is one such example. In a recent letter, I cited another: the interpretation - created garbage can
RECEIVED
Schmidt to Council, CC Mall Appeal, Page
.14N 1 9 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
00
placement "ordinance" and staff's threat to criminally prosecute me for "violation" of this non - existent "ordinance."
could cite many other examples. Council must make clear to staff that while there is a place for staff
interpretations" -- for example to clarify or amplify the intent of the Council in enacting an ordinance -- ,
interpretations must NEVER be used to alter the intent or effect of an ordinance. In the past, staff has explained to
me that they regard ordinances as mere "guidelines," not as hard and fast things which must be followed; therein
lies the problem. Ordinances are the law, and must be followed. Council needs to reign in staff's legjslative self -
empowerment.
4. Delegating ultimate approval authority for this project to the ARC in effect hides it from public scrutiny and
minimizes public involvement in the decision. NOBODY follows what the ARC does including the media. Those
2ersons knowledgeable about the public review process EXPECT important decisions to come before the Planning
Commission and City Council. The first I knew about this project's reaching "completion" of the review process was
when I read the congratulatory after- the -fact newspaper story which prompted my letter of Dec. 8. The city has a
responsibility to involve the public widely in the approval process for important projects. A 200,000 square foot
regional shopping mall deserves a higher level of public review than a house in Ferrini Heights, yet in this case it
has been granted no greater review, and quite possibly less. Even if the ARC final review were legal, it would be
BAD PUBLIC POLICY.
5. If this review had been conducted openly and in the proper forums, I might have been able to raise issues like
the following:
A. Should a city's long range regional shoppina planning be driven by the desire of a corporate financier and its
developer to establish a quick- and -dirty fix which will rp obably work no better than its predecessor? Developers
always speak eloquently about the prospects for their plans: that is their job. Let's review what was said about
the existing mall's hotel anchor by Dan Burgner of Trojan Enterprises, the developer. "We're getting more and
more excited about it," Burgner said about the hotel -as- anchor as opening day approached. "We're on the
leading edge in the middle- market area... We're sure it is [a good idea to replace a second department store
anchor with a hotel]." Burgner explained further: After being contacted by Laral Hotel Group about including a
hotel as an anchor, "We were reluctant at first" because this deviated from the tried - and -true shopping center
formula, "but the more we thought about it, the more sense it seemed to make." This set of quotes comes fron
an article titled "Casting A Hotel as An Anchor" in the Sunday, March 1, 1987, New York Times! The previous
developer thought he was very clever indeed. So, beware when listening to siren songs about the present
proposal!
B. Should a city's future retail land use be dictated by "fad of the year" land use lap nning? Box development is
still in favor, though cracks in its future are already visible. Who has loyalty to a box? As Internet shopping
progresses, these places will all go out of business. Will we become like Chico with vacant boxes lining our
main strip mall street? And then what? Why aren't we true to our own ways? We have a desirable city, and we
can set the terms by which retail develops here. When will we realize our potential and our enviable position?
We don't have to take what's offered, and ought not to settle for the lowest common denominator of retail
development.
C. Is the reason for the mall's failure as well as that of the neighboring mall, physical layout (i.e., the excuse for
demolition), or could it be [heresy!] that San Luis Obispo already has all the "shopping opportunities" it can
support?
D. Is not the demolition of a potentially salvageable 12- year -old mall a crime against the wise use of the earth's
resources. Consider that this building is nearly new, that it is sturdy, that it is of flexible layout (interior walls can
be moved around freely, as they are non - supporting), and offers plenty of space for alternative arrangements
within the current structural. fabric. Consider a couple of issues that arise from demolition of such a building:
• This is extremely wasteful of materials. My construction photos of the mall show that is is built with a forest
of steel posts, hundreds of huge gluelam beams, thousands of heavy 2 x 10 timbers, and acres of plywood
roof sheathing, as well as the more visible materials. All of this will be wasted in demolition. The approval's
"recycling" condition is nonsense: it basically aims to keep some materials out of the landfill, not to truly
salvage what's potentially reusable. It is window dressing to excuse the incredible waste this project entai'
Schmidt to Council, CC Mall Appeal, Page 2
This waste leads to pressures to cut more old growth forests for additional construction, to mine more coal
and iron, smelt and import more steel, and so on. THIS WASTE OF MATERIALS IS A VERY SERIOUS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
• This is an energy atrocity. Using a relatively simple method for approximating the energy impacts of a
building project developed by the federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Richard Stein and
others, I have calculated the following: that demolition will destroy built fabric embodying the energy
equivalent of 1.53 million gallons of gasoline, that demolition will require expenditure of an additional energy
equivalent of 11,000 gallons of gasoline, and that building the proposed replacement will use the energy
equivalent of 1.4 million gallons of gasoline. The total energy impact of this demolition and rebuilding -- not
including any operational energy -- will thus be about 3 million gallons of gasoline. Is this wise? Is it
necessary? When you read about greenhouse warming of the earth, just remember that every project you
approve is part of the cause of this problem. Can't we do better than this? THIS EMBODIED ENERGY
WASTE IS A VERY SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
E. From what the public knows, it does not appear that meaningful alternatives which entail working with more
of the existing mall have been seriously studied. Demolition appears to be a quick - and -dirty fix with serious
long -tens planning consequences and insufficient study of possible alternatives. Better alternatives might
include:
• Redesign of the connection with Madonna Plaza so that Sears can function as part of the draw through
Central Coast Mall. This obvious issue was shunned by an egotistical developer who told me, when I sat on
the Planning Commission in review of the mall, that his mall could stand alone and didn't need to relate to
that other mall over there!
• Redesign/rebuilding of a portion of the mall
possibly two stories in height. People in Sari
the strip mall box junk proposed. Logical ten
have done famously well in Santa Barbara.
• Redesign of portions of the existing mall to
while maintaining the pedestrian street of the
These are serious issues which deserve discussion.
capable of being the forum for such discussion.
near the hotel to accommodate an upscale department store,
Luis Obispo say they want an upscale department store, not
arts might include a small Nordstrom or Macy's, both of which
accommodate some larger box tenants facing the parking lot,
inner mall.
Clearly, the ARC -- by its own chair's admission — is not
In conclusion, I would hope the public hearing process you will follow by following the law, i.e., hearings before the
Planning Commission and City Council, will provide a forum for the full and meaningful discussion of what has, till
now, been basically a back room discussion between staff and developers and some esthetic window dressing by
the ARC.
I urge you, again, to uphold the appeal. To do otherwise sends a clear signal of the city's willingness to
behave In an unlawful manner.
P icharred ly, tat
Schmidt
A�U644t�: Z%c 8 lzW♦
Schniidt io Council, CC Mall Appeal, Page 3
Ift
RICHARD SCHMIDT
112 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 544 -4247
e -mail: rschmidt @calpoly.edu
December 8, 1998
To the City Council:
I am disturbed by staff's apparent rewriting of our Planned Development ordinance via an
"interpretation."
When I read in today's newspaper that the demolition and rebuilding of Central Coast Mall
received its only and final public review at the hands of the Architectural Review Commission,
thought to myself: "That must be a mistake on the reporter's part." But when I checked with
staff, I found it was not a mistake -- that this is how staff is handling this project.
Central Coast Mall is a Planned Development (PD). There are exacting ordinance
requirements for PDs to meet. PDs, whether new or revised, must go through a careful
review of uses (their on -site mix must be specifically reviewed) and of site planning, which are
things customarily (and in this case by ordinance) dealt with by the Planning Commission and
the City Council, not the ARC.
urge you to look at Chapter 17.62 of the municipal code. It is very explicit. A PD re uire
actions by both the Planning Commission (Section 17.62.020) and the Council (Section
17.62.030.) The ARC is not even mentioned in the ordinance. After approval, an existing PD
may be "amended" within certain limits by action of the Planning Commssion, but the
amendment process would not appear valid for the present rather major project because the
ordinance states: "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 reap_alication..." (Section 17.62.080.C) It is clear that the project
contains changes in the mix of uses (substitution of large box stores for a pedestrian mall of
small shops) as well as changes in configuration of uses (freestanding boxes and stores on
pads rather than an enclosed mall) and significant changes in vehicular circulation features
(the separation of hotel and mall by a road, the roadway links to adjacent properties,
completely changed parking layout, etc.) as well as in pedestrian circulation features
(elimination of pedestrian -only mall linking all site features).
Haste to restore this dead shopping center to productivity is no excuse for wilful violation of
ordinances by the city! If a citizen were to attempt such wholesale violation of municipal
ordinances, your staff would haul the citizen into court. The city's own actions must set a
sterling example of adherence to the law, not of legal evasion.
call upon you to require that this proiect go through the proper PD process contained in our
ci1y laws.
Richard Schmidt
6
VAIL e =.1TEM # (
memonanbum
On January 6`h and Th I attended a League Leadership Workshop in Sacramento becoming much
more familiar with the details of League operations and with their extremely well organized staff.
It appears to me that the League has a good handle on the needs and concerns of local cities and
will be lobbying aggressively on behalf of cities during the year. One item of special interest:
League staff emphasizes all cities should become very closely connected with their state
legislators, inviting them to all meetings, all special city functions, League Division meetings
and in every way possible including them in the local scene, and making them truly a part of our
local organization, thus reflecting our issues more completely when they consider state
legislation.
During one of the discussions it was pointed out that term limitations has had the effect of
reorienting state legislators more toward the needs of local constituents and less oriented toward
events which occur in Sacramento. This allows a golden opportunity for local communities to
have more influence on the state legislative program.
The Channel Counties Division League meeting will be held on Friday, February 51 at Embassy
Suites in San Luis Obispo, with hospitality /network time beginning at 6:00 p.m. Please mark
your calendars. As president of the Division, I would be extremely pleased to have a large
contingent from San Luis Obispo at all of our League meetings.
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
At its meeting of January 13, 1999, the Board received a report from the IWMA manager that the
Worm Bin Program had been extraordinarily successful. We sold 1,200 worm bins within five
hours and have a waiting list of 300 additional people. An analysis of the waste stream showed
that food waste is a major component, therefore, the Worm Bin Program is simply another
effective means of reducing the waste stream and meeting our AB 939 goals. The Board
authorized staff to order an additional 1,200 worm bins at a subsidized cost of $39.00 per bin.
DR:ss
.IAN 19 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
CrOWNCIL
❑ L,
January 14, 1999
A'CAO
❑ Fla
WACAO
O FIRE U.-I,
WATMRNEY
O PW DIR
TO:
Council Colleagues :,btLfRK10RIQ
O POUCE CHF
❑ MGMT TEAM
O REC DIR
❑
O UTIL DIR
FROM:
Dave Romero ❑
O PERS DIR
SUBJECT:
Liaison Report: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
On January 6`h and Th I attended a League Leadership Workshop in Sacramento becoming much
more familiar with the details of League operations and with their extremely well organized staff.
It appears to me that the League has a good handle on the needs and concerns of local cities and
will be lobbying aggressively on behalf of cities during the year. One item of special interest:
League staff emphasizes all cities should become very closely connected with their state
legislators, inviting them to all meetings, all special city functions, League Division meetings
and in every way possible including them in the local scene, and making them truly a part of our
local organization, thus reflecting our issues more completely when they consider state
legislation.
During one of the discussions it was pointed out that term limitations has had the effect of
reorienting state legislators more toward the needs of local constituents and less oriented toward
events which occur in Sacramento. This allows a golden opportunity for local communities to
have more influence on the state legislative program.
The Channel Counties Division League meeting will be held on Friday, February 51 at Embassy
Suites in San Luis Obispo, with hospitality /network time beginning at 6:00 p.m. Please mark
your calendars. As president of the Division, I would be extremely pleased to have a large
contingent from San Luis Obispo at all of our League meetings.
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
At its meeting of January 13, 1999, the Board received a report from the IWMA manager that the
Worm Bin Program had been extraordinarily successful. We sold 1,200 worm bins within five
hours and have a waiting list of 300 additional people. An analysis of the waste stream showed
that food waste is a major component, therefore, the Worm Bin Program is simply another
effective means of reducing the waste stream and meeting our AB 939 goals. The Board
authorized staff to order an additional 1,200 worm bins at a subsidized cost of $39.00 per bin.
DR:ss
.IAN 19 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
MEMO
January 18, 1999
MEETING AGENDA- ��'���
JE - i 9- ff ITEM # LP
To: Mayor Allen Settle and Council s, John Ewan, Jan Howell Marx
Dave Romero
From Council Member Ken Schwart
Re: Liaison Reports
Copies: John Dunn, CAO; Lee Price, Clerk
This report covers two meetings:
1. Downtown Association Board of Directors
Tuesday, January 12
Several items continue to generate concern amongst Board members. These include
parking (let's get on with it); the Higuera Street Bridge project coming up; the
economic impact study underway for the proposed Marketplace; newspaper racks
proliferating on downtown sidewalks; and the need for downtown restroom facilities.
On the latter topic, some literature on a French sidewalk toilet was reviewed with
some enthusiasm These are self cleaning and cost a quarter to use (or a token
obtained from the police department). I have seen these in Paris and they're not bad.
I suspect the DA will be pushing the Council to rum an experiment.
'Tn-st Might" was given kudos for a job well done although there were questions as to
whether running it on Farmers' Market night was good or not.
The Board briefly discussed the Council's two year goals program and appeared
satisfied with the submitted goals they submitted. (Moving ahead with Court Street
development at an early time is still not fully supported,)
The BIG good news was a report on the County Facilities Master Plan prepared by Jay
Farbstein and Associates of SLO. Jay's report recommends that the major County
administrative facilities as well as the courts stay downtown and expand onto the site
presently occupied by the County garage and doughnut shop properties running
between Monterey and Higuera. (This makes great sense to me and correlates with
the recommendations contained in the city's Downtown Concept Plan.)
My observation is that the Board's committees which consist of Economic Activities,
Parking, Promotions, Beautification and Thursday Night Activities continue to work
quite effectively. Board elections are coming up soon.
RECEIVED
.JAN 1 9 1999
SW CITY COUNCIL
CIL
DI R
UFINNDIR
EY
RKIORIG
f CHIEF
W DIR
0 P CE C HF
EC DIR
O UTIL DIR
0 PEM DIR
Several items continue to generate concern amongst Board members. These include
parking (let's get on with it); the Higuera Street Bridge project coming up; the
economic impact study underway for the proposed Marketplace; newspaper racks
proliferating on downtown sidewalks; and the need for downtown restroom facilities.
On the latter topic, some literature on a French sidewalk toilet was reviewed with
some enthusiasm These are self cleaning and cost a quarter to use (or a token
obtained from the police department). I have seen these in Paris and they're not bad.
I suspect the DA will be pushing the Council to rum an experiment.
'Tn-st Might" was given kudos for a job well done although there were questions as to
whether running it on Farmers' Market night was good or not.
The Board briefly discussed the Council's two year goals program and appeared
satisfied with the submitted goals they submitted. (Moving ahead with Court Street
development at an early time is still not fully supported,)
The BIG good news was a report on the County Facilities Master Plan prepared by Jay
Farbstein and Associates of SLO. Jay's report recommends that the major County
administrative facilities as well as the courts stay downtown and expand onto the site
presently occupied by the County garage and doughnut shop properties running
between Monterey and Higuera. (This makes great sense to me and correlates with
the recommendations contained in the city's Downtown Concept Plan.)
My observation is that the Board's committees which consist of Economic Activities,
Parking, Promotions, Beautification and Thursday Night Activities continue to work
quite effectively. Board elections are coming up soon.
RECEIVED
.JAN 1 9 1999
SW CITY COUNCIL
2. Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee, League of California Cities
San Francisco, Thursday, January 14
This was my first meeting as one of two representatives of the Channel Cities Division
of the LCC. (I last served on this same committee in 1977 -78.) The committee is
chaired by Bob Price, Mayor of Bakersfield, and consists of 50 members and two LCC
staff I was pleasantly surprised to see the interaction in the discussions - no one
appeared bashfuL
After opening remarks, introductions and a few routine announcements, the serious
work got underway. The major theme of this meeting was e- commerce or
telemarketing. The fact that Congress has given a three -year moratorium from
taxation is giving local government fits. Use of the internet for the buying of goods it
predicted to grow by leaps and bounds. And as it does, it will eat into local retail sales
and that means a reduction in sales taxes which, as we know, is a major revenue
generator for local governments. One example: Chysler Corp. did a study the results
of which predict that in four years (4) 25 % of all auto sales will occur via e-
marketing.
Joe HiLson, Hayward Council Member and chair of the League's Telemarketing
Committee; Donald Maynor, Attorney at Law, Atherton; Brian Moura, Assistant City
Manager, San Carlos; Annette Nelson, Professor, College of Business, CSU, San Jose;
and Terry Ryan, Vice President, Tax Policy, Apple.Inc., Cupertino made up a panel
speaking to "Potential Impact of Electronic Commerce on Revenue and Taxation.
The discussion was lively and I have several `papers" should any of you care to read
about the topic. The Committee voted to continue discussions into the next meeting.
AB 83, (Gardens) a bill which would preempt local government control of Home -
bases businesses was brought up for committee discussion and vote. The committee
voted unanimously to have the LCC Board oppose AB 83. Another bill ABXX
(Lempert) received mixed support. This as yet unnumbered bill would allow certain
property owners to transfer the base value of their primary residence from one county
to another in limited cases: (a) for victims of a crime who are being stalked; and (b) for
victims of natural disasters. The committee voted in majority to oppose (8) but
supported (b) on a 60 - 40 vote. This may be moot for us as I seem to recall that SLO
county voted not to support base property tax transfers.
It was clear that everyone present wanted money back from the State and were
hopeful that the new Guv would recognize the condition of local government coffers
depleted by state raids over the last couple of years.
MEETING AGENDA '`%OQJvtu
DATE 1" 12 -2q REM # JAN 1 21998 I'"O
January 11, 1999 u�0 anti o
SLO CITY CLERK iNaionom0 °0J0
BI0 Md O A3NNOLM3
City Council d31NO3J1d0 0tl0tlea
City of San Luis Obispo U10 U0 �I�NO m
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 �
Subject: Appeal of the Central Coast Mall
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
The appeal for the Planning Commission to review the Central Coast Mall remodel project
appears to be a valid one and therefore should ultimately be brought to that body for
consideration of the proposal. However, before any Planning Commission hearing, the
staff, the community, the ARC and City Council should define a concept plan for integrating
Madonna Plaza, Central Coast Mall and the Dalidio property.
The proposal for remodeling the central coast plaza could be improved significantly. The
architectural design as originally proposed has been modified at the direction of the ARC,
but the building placement and site plan contain major design flaws and missed
opportunities. The most significant flaw is the redesign to a strip mall style with a vehicle
rather than pedestrian orientation. An example of a missed opportunity is evident by the
way the project turns it back on Madonna Plaza by turning El Mercado into a service alley
for delivery trucks. If Madonna Plaza is ever going to revitalize, it should be provided with
opportunities for more direct pedestrian access to the central coast mall. El Mercado
should become a shopping street, not a service alley showcasing the backs of large
buildings. Customers will not "shop" in the center, rather they will drive up to the store to
purchase an item and then either drive to another store or leave. This design will not
encourage shopping or pedestrian accessibility and is not the type of development that is
appropriate for San Luis Obispo.
It is suggested that the City Council consider hiring a planning or architectural design
consultant to prepare a concept plan for the Madonna Plaza, Central Coast Mall and the
Dalidio Property. The concept plan would reflect the desired direction that the city council
would like to see the three properties take. This concept plan could then act a frame of
reference for evaluating the proposed Central Coast Mall as well other future proposals.
Concept plans often have a foretelling effect on eventual development of property by
providing a vision for developers and property owners. Without a concept plan property
owners may only consider their site development and the result can be a mix of piecemeal
design. In preparation for a concept plan the consultant would, together with staff, hold a
workshop in which all the stakeholders and interested individuals would be invited to
participate. The goal of the workshop would be to arrive at an acceptable design for the
entire shopping center that would tie it together and provide a design that reflects the
uniqueness of San Luis Obispo.
While identifying opportunities for economic revitalization of the properties, this
City Council
January 11, 1999
Page2
comprehensive planning effort would also encourage a design with a compact urban form,
interesting outdoor public spaces, as well as attractive buildings. In summary, design
goals should include:
■ Consider placement of buildings with a closer proximity to each other to encourage
a pedestrian orientation.
■ Provide for unique project concepts and a design motif that is in keeping with the
rural small -town character of San Luis Obispo.
■ Consider a variety of store sizes and uses aimed at both local and regional markets
that do not directly compete with downtown businesses.
■ Buildings along El Mercado and Dalidio Drive should consider orientation for
pedestrian access for development as shopping streets, not service alleys for
loading vehicles.
■ Provision should be made for passive outdoor spaces and plazas that provide
seating and interesting focal points such landscaped planters or fountains as well
as to provide shelter from prevailing winds.
■ Parking lots should be visible to customers but located at the perimeter or rear of
stores to help reduce the visual impact of large paved areas.
■ Priority should be given to encourage pedestrian access to stores on each site and
between the three primary sites.
■ Future building development on the Dilidio Property should be oriented close to
Dilidio Drive with tree- covered parking areas to the south and west to buffer views
of large buildings and paving from Highway 101 and surrounding properties.
M y,
Chuck Stevenson
3320 Flora
San Luis Obispo
CA 93401
JAN 12 1998
SLO CITY CLERK
January 12, 1999
MEETING_ AGENDA
2230 Exposition Drive No. RATE REM #. I _
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
[MUNCIL
DD DIR
RCAO
❑ FIN DIR
KCAO
❑ FIRE CH I EF
❑ PW DIR
LERKIORIG
❑POLIC E CHF
13 M MT T4M
❑ REC D IR
13
❑ UTII D IR
❑ CG'
It�TORNEY
❑ PERS DR
Subject: Appeal of the Central Coast Mall; January 19, 1999 agenda
Dear Mayor and Council members:
My understanding of this and any appeal is that once an appeal is filed, all aspects are open
to consideration as if it were a new application. Called de novo by attorneys, this re- opening
of all issues was confirmed to me by staff. Your decision regarding this application will I hope
refer the application to the Planning Commission for consideration of a significant change to a
final development plan. I support the appellant's contention that Zoning Ordinance section
17.62.080B specifically applies to this project. Contrary to staffs belief that the proposal is an
insignificant one, it plainly is a dramatic change from an enclosed mall with small stores to an
outdoor shopping center with a few medium -sized stores, with new circulation and an entirely
new parking lot and building design.
If you refer the application to the Planning Commission, would you please give some direction
for a more detailed review than previously given by the Architectural Review Commission
(ARC). My request is to have a brief process of preparing a concept plan for the three
shopping centers (Madonna Plaza, Central Coast Mall and Dalidio Marketplace) before
scheduling any decision on the mall. In the 1994 Land Use Element hearings, I requested
such a process as one essential element to revitalizing the two existing centers. The Council
at that time disagreed. However, this project exemplifies the hazard of allowing each project
to come forward without community guidance. Staff meetings may have been held with the
applicant, but no one on staff has the benefit of a document that guides the design of these
centers. As a result, individual opinions have run along very close to the lowest common
denominator through this process.
To have a productive process of reviewing this application, I ask that you do the following:
Approve the appeal and refer the application to the Planning Commission as required
by the Zoning Ordinance, with direction that the Commission only hear this application
after a community process of master planning the three shopping centers.
2. Also, direct staff to work with the Architectural Review Commission to hire a consultant
experienced in the latest shopping center revitalization designs, and to schedule a
brief design exercise, such as a two or three -day workshop, to involve the community
and the ARC with the consultant's skills. A report can be published from this that could
be adopted as part of the PD zoning on the sites, as well as it could be used as a
City Council - Central Coast Mall appeal
January 12, 1999
Page 2
reference to finish the review of this application.
shopping centers would be participants in this eft
would. The City of Boulder, Colorado completed
redesign of a proposed Safeway shopping cente
successful.
The owners and tenants of the
ort, but would not drive it, the City
such an effort that guided a major
r, that is now built and very
3. Finally, direct the ARC to consider the design of the proposal as a part of the Planning
Commission's review, before the Planning Commission's final decision, from the
standpoint of the outcome of the master planning, as well as to utilize LLLIlY the existing
ARC guidelines in detail.
These actions will ensure that the community finally gets to have a say, none too soon, in re-
defining these centers, hopefully using the best of recent trends toward pedestrian - oriented,
intensive shopping and entertainment experiences. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, ��
Imes Lopes