Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/1999, 3 - PD 201-98 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY'S ZONING MAP DESIGNATION FROM C-S-S, SERVICE-COMMERICAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OVERLAY ZONING, TO C-S-S-PD, SERVICE-COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZON council - �- q I illj agcnaa REpont �,�N 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Prepared By: Pam Ricci,Associate Planner F>k SUBJECT: PD 201-98 - Request to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration'overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service- Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located on the east side of Broad Street,north of Capitolio Way (3450 Broad Street). CAO RECOMMENDATION: Introduce an ordinance to print approving a negative declaration and amending the zoning map from C-S-S to C-S-S-PD for property located at 3450 Broad Street,based on findings. DISCUSSION Bacicg Mand The new Acacia Creek Commercial building is nearing completion of construction. The project proposes to add the Planned Development(PD) overlay zoning to the site to enable large office tenants.The Planning Commission reviews zoning amendments and makes a recommendation to the City Council,which takes a final action on such requests. City Council adopted amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Regulations in March 1987 that allowed some large offices in the C-S and M zones with the approval of a planned development rezoning. The enabling ordinance was adopted because the existing office zones did not provide adequate room to accommodate the number of large (over 2,500 square feet) offices expected to need space within the City (Office Supply and Demand Study, Quad Engineering, 1986). The proposed PD overlay zoning is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 3.3.2 E,which states that large offices,with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having limited need for client visits or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and Manufacturing districts,subject to approval of a Planned Development(PD)zoning application. Planning Commission's Review/Action on Rezoning On March 10, 1999,the Planning Commission on a 6-0-1 vote(Chairperson Senn refrained from participation due to a stated potential conflict of interest) reviewed the initial study of environmental impact, and recommended approval of the request to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned 3-1 Acacia Creek Commercial f 0 (PD 201-98) Page 2 Development overlay zonings to the City Council,based on findings,and with conditions. The item had been continued from the Commission's February 10, 1999 meeting to get further information and clarification on several issues from staff, and to postpone a recommendation until after their Commercial Zoning Workshop scheduled for February 24, 1999. The attached staff report prepared for the 3-10-99 hearing highlights each of the Commission's concerns and provides a response to each one. The Commission was satisfied that added conditions addressed their concerns with the type of fimctions and activities contemplated for proposed large offices and that adequate on-site parking would be provided. Findings for Large Office Planned Developments Municipal Code Section 17.62.040 C. allowing large professional offices to be established through the PD overlay was added to the Planned Development zone section of the zoning regulations in 1987. It is highlighted as a separate section with its own unique findings. This differentiates the use of the PD to establish large offices from the traditional application of the PD zone which is to grant exceptions to different development standards to protect resources and to the encourage creative designs. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the PD for the Acacia Creek Commercial project made all of the required five findings outlined in the code, as well as two additional findings dealing with the appropriateness of government offices at the site and the environmental determination. In general, required findings cite: compatibility of proposed offices with other nearby uses, including residences; non-interference of proposed offices with established light manufacturing uses in the area; and not creating a shortage of land zoned for light industrial uses. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt the Resolution, included as Attachment 2, denying the requested zoning map amendment based on inconsistency with the City's General Plan. 2. Continue with direction to the staff. Attachments Attachment 1: Ordinance approving the rezoning Attachment 2: Resolution denying the rezoning Attachment 3: Information received 3-8-99 from WestPac Investments, Inc. for Planning Commission Attachment 4: Planning Commission follow-up letter& Resolution No. 5251-99 Attachment 5: Draft 3-10-99 Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 6: 3-10-99 Planning Commission Staff Report Attachment 7: 2-10-99 Planning Commission Staff Report 3-2 ORDINANCE NO. (1999 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM SERVICE-COMMERCIAL w1TH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OVERLAY . ZONE(C-S-S)TO SERVICE-COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONES (C-&S-PD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3450 BROAD STREET(PD 201-98) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on February 10, 19999 and March 10, 1999, and ultimately recommended approval of the rezoning (PD 201-98) to change the designation on the City's zoning map from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located at 3450 Broad Street;and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on, April 6, 1999, and has considered testimony of the applicant,interested parties,the records of the Planning Commission hearings and actions,and the evaluation and recommendation of staff;and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the General Plan and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the draft Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that the projed's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed general plan map amendment and rezoning, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration. 3-3 Ordinance No. (1999 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed rezoning to change the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings,makes the following findings: 1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area 2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential zones. 3. The project, which is a PD rezoning to allow some large offices at the site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise, light and glare,and loss of privacy,among others,imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas. 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 6. The project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on government office locations, with the recommended condition that the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program should be located in either the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue, and is not an appropriate use at this outlying commercial site that is completely detached from other governmental services. 7. A Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on January 12, 1999, which describes the potential environmental impacts associated with the projecL The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. SECTION 3. Action. The request to change the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located at 3450 Broad Street, is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: 3-4 Ordinance No. (1999 Series) Page 3 1. A maximum of 39,000 gross square feet of floor space in the existing buildings on the site may be occupied by professional office uses. 2. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in the zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply. The list of uses approved through Use Permit A 88-97 shall continue to apply, with the amendments imposed through this PD approval allowing large offices with some restrictions. 3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single professional office tenant may occupy less than 2500 square feet of adjacent,interconnected floor area 4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,medical clinics,doctors offices,and lawyers offices. 5. Mezzanine additions to existing tenant spaces within the building are prohibited to keep a balance between floor space provided in the building and available on-site parking spaces. This condition nullifies and supersedes Condition No. 1 of Use Permit A 88-97. 6. No mixed use and/or shared parking reductions shall be allowed at the site. 7. Cuesta Title, or any other title company that locates at the site in the finure, shall maintain a customer service office, such as an escrow office,elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories where there is not the restriction on customer visitations. S. The proposed use of the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program is not allowed because it has been determined to be a type of government office use with a close functional relationship to the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue. However, other government agencies not functionally related to general government,social services,or health care operations,as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1 may be allowed at the site through the approval of an administrative use permit where it can be demonstrated that there is limited need for public visitation. The Hearing Officer may refer these requests to the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General Plan consistency issues. 9. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional traffic impact fees to be paid prior to issuance of building permits for the tenant improvements. A credit shall be given for those traffic impact fees already paid with the shell building permit (based on a C-S zone commercialtwarehouse). 10.Bicycle Parldng: The applicant shall provide additional short- and long-term parking for bicycles as follows: 3-5 Ordinance No. (1999 Series) Page 4 • Relocate the rack shown adjacent to the BFGC Architects tenant space to be in front of the unallocated tenant space, and install an additional rack (for two bicycles) near the main entrance to the BFGC space(possibly to the right of the entry). • Install an additional rack (for four bicycles) on the north side of the building near the main entry to the space where the County of SLO Drug Rehab was proposed. • On all plans submitted for tenant improvements for each of the proposed tenant spaces, clearly identify the lockable rooms that will be reserved for employee bicycle storage consistent with standards of the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. 11.Transit Stop: The applicant has requested relocation of the existing transit stop at Capitolio Way and Broad Street to accommodate the proposed Tri-Counties Regional Center. This is agreeable to staff, contingent upon approval of the design by the City's Transit Manager and approval of any requisite encroachment permit by Caltrans. If pursued by the applicant, the facility shall include a transit turnout, shelter, lighting and a trash receptacle along the property's Broad Street frontage,north of Acacia Creek. SECTION 4. Adoption. 1. The zoning map is hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A. 2. The Community Development Director shall cause the change to be reflected in documents which are on display in City Hall and are available for public viewing and use. SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30)days after its final passage. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of . 1999,on a motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: 3-6 Ordinance No. (1999 Series) Page 5 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of . 1999. Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: Lee Price, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: i tto y • ey . Jorgensen 3-7 .� y4 > �I. a •- -. � -�. � y rr � ,� M► ✓ s ,, rST" _ !• ANSI Le n • S .'•v``�``�`. . �� RUONING MAP V d / ' � • � • I RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM SERVICE-COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OVERLAY ZONE (C-S-S)TO SERVICE-COMMERCIAL WITH THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONES(C-S-S-PD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3450 BROAD STREET(PD 201-98) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on February 10, 1999, and March 10, 1999, and ultimately recommended approval of the rezoning (PD 201-98) to change the designation on the City's zoning map from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located at 3450 Broad Street; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on, April 6, 1999, and has considered testimony of the applicant,interested parties,the records of the Planning Commission hearings and actions,and the evaluation and recommendation of staff;and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed rezoning is inconsistent with the General Plan and other applicable City ordinances. BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. 1. The project is inconsistentwith the General Plan because[Council to specify reasons). SECTION 2. Action. The request to rezone the property located at 3450 Broad Street from C-S-S to C-S-S-PD is hereby denied. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: 3-9 Resolution No. (1999 Series) Paget .AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted.tlus—day of _ _, 1.999.. . Mayor Allen.Settle ATTEST: Lee..Price,City. Clerk- APPROVED lerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney.Jeffrey G..Jorgensen 3-10 wesa)acc- March 8' 1999 RECEIVED MAR 08 1999 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Commissioner Sean City of San Lois Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Re: 3450 Broad Street San Luis Obispo,CA Acacia Credo PD Overlay Dear Commissioner Sem►: In anticipation of our hearing on Wednesday night,I thought it appropriate to point out some-tali eoi fa= In order for Acacia Creek to qualify for a PD it must comply with the following five findings: 1. The project must be compatible with existing and allowed land uses m the area 2. The project's location or access arrangement must not mgmfic an ly 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 newly residential areas,by using methods so&as setbacks,landscapes berming or fencing 4. The project does not preclude industrial or service commercial uses m areas especially suited for such uses when compared with offices. 5. The project does not aeaW a shortage of CS and M zoned land available for service commercial or industrial development. Acacia Credo has met A of the above findings and complies with them. (Please refer to Eahill t A) Secandly,Acacia Greek most be conmstem with the General Plan. Under the General Plan(3.3.2 it states: Wegir Ly E:-LOffices,with no single tenant space"Less than 2500 sa/ft"and having no substantial public lt�si; arge visitation or need for access to down town government services may be m service and mamrfadrai ug R''stpac MWIter COT districts,subject to approval of a Planned Development Zoning ap&Mdc n, ' BW6-%a Acacia Creek is also consistent with the General Plan wader 33.2-E. (Please refer to Exhibit B) Under Acacia Creek's previous approvals it is allowed to accommodate certain tenants such as engineering firms,architect's offices,design and graphic offices,administration and meeting rooms,etc.(Please see attached Exhibit C) ATTACHMENT 3 WestPae hrvestrnents,Inc. 1880 s RubamG:� "sinF SoLdsOldsM80`WSW7349•FAX 8XJM4-U77 3-11 Westpac Investments,Inc. March 8, 1999 Page 2 I have attached a copy of current listings for commercial office space within the City of San Luis Obispo. As you can see,then:is very little office space available,and virtually none that could accommodate the size tenants that Acacia Creek is proposing.(Exhibit D) Acacia Creek will,with the approval of a PD Overlay,fill a large nicker need for those businesses wanting or needing to expend within the City Limits It will also service a need for those businesses wanting to expand into the City of San Luis Obispo. In light of all of these fads,I would hope that the Planing Commissioners could see to move this item forward with the recommendation to City Canal for approval as per staff's recommendations Sincerely yours, i � G Hamish vee President Development Encs: 3-12 Acacia Creek PD Overlay EXHIBIT A 3-13 Mar-08-99 11 :26A Westp 80F. 198 8821 I.. . emergency access areas; points of access to public 1. It provides facilities or amenities suited to a part,; rights-0f-way; proposed ownership of circulation routes; occupancy group(such as the elderly or families with chit: which would not be feasible under conventional zoning: 6. Existing and proposed sidewalks and paths; 2. It transfers allowable development, within a siu!. from ares of greater environmental sensitivity or hazard L.,- 7. 7. Existing and proposed utility systems, including sanitary areas of less sensitivity or hazard; sewer, storm drainage, water, electricity, gas and telephone; 3. It provides more affordable-housing than woui:i w possible with conventional development; S. A general landscape plan. 4. Features of the particular design achieve the nnL lit(.t' conventional standards (privacy, usable open space, adequate 9. A general grading plan; parking,compatibility with neighborhood character, and w x;i as well as or better than the standards themselves; G. Information on land area adjacent to the proposed S. It incorporates features which result in consumption development, indicating important relationships between the of less materials. energy or water than cooventi.iad proposal and surrounding land uses, cin sudation systems, development; public facilities and natural features; 6. The proposed project provides exceptional public benefits such as parking, open space, landscaping.public an. H. Any additional information which may be required by the and other special amenities which would not be feasible under director to evaluate the character and impact of the planned conventional development standards. development. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9204.4(A)) B. In order to grant a 'density bonus' (as explained in Section 17:50.030), the Commission and Council mura find 17,62.020 Actions of the Plaaoing Commission. that the proposed development satisfies at least three of the five criteria set out in subsection A of this section. The After giving notim as provided in Section 17.70.030, the applicant shall provide a detailed statement indicating how the Planning Commission shall hold a public -hearing on the development satisfies the appropriate criteria set out in application. The Planning Commission may approve,approve subsection A of this section. The maximum density boor subject to oetta rt modifications,or deny the application. The not automatic. In determining the allowable bonus, decision of the Planning Commission shall be in the form of Commission and Council shall assess the extent to which these a recommendation to the Council sad shall be rendered in criteria are not. writing,stating all modifications or conditions to be reflected in the final development plan. (Ord. 941. - 1 (put), 1982: C. To approve a planned development allowing large prior code 9204.4($)) professional office buildings which can include multiple tenodts but with no single tenant spam less than 2.500 square 17.62.030 Actions of the Count3l. feet in the C-S or M zones, the Pleading Commission or Council mist fend that it meets each of the criteria listed After giving notice as provided in Section 17.70.030, the below. The following types of offhco-related uses are Caamcil shall hold a public hearing on the application and the prohibited in planned developments approved for C-S and M recommendations of the Planning Commission. The Council zones: Banks, real estate offices. financial institutions, tray approve, approve subject to certain modifications, or medical clinics and doctors' offices and lawyers' offices. deny the proposal. The decision of the Council shall be rendered in writing, stating all modifications or conditions to 1. The project will be compatible with existing and be reflected in the final development plan. if it approves or allowed land uses in the area. conditionally approves the preliminary development plan, the 2. The project's location or access arrangement do not Council shall approve the wooing and the official zone map significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in shall be amended to indicate approval of the planned residential zones. development. (Ord. 941 - I (part). 1982: prior code 3. The project will provide adequate mitigation. to 9204.4(C)) address potential impacts related to noise. light and glare. and loas of privacy, among others. imposed by commercial 17.62.040 Required findings. activities an nearby residential areas. by rising methods such as setbacks. landscaping, barring and fencing. A. To approve a planned development, the Planning 4. The project does not preclude industrial or service- Coamupron and Council must fend that it meets ane or more commercial uses in areas especially suited for such uses v of the following criteria: compared with offices. 5. The project does not create a shortage of C-S and M zoned land avLlable for service co niaj or ituiucsral 71 3 14 Mar-08-99 21 :26A WestF 80E ;98 8821 P . development. (Ord. 1I29- I (part), 1988: Ord. 1087- I Ex. 17.62.080 Amendment of final development plats. A(2), 1987; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9204.4(D)) A. Minor diffaraees bexwtxa the approved development p 1 ar.. 17.62.050 Requirement.for development plea. ® tr d construction plans may be allowed by the Director B. Written requests for amendments to a final develupnr•nt No land division may be undertaken and no construction begun plan may be approved by the Planning Commission r,It:cr within an arcs zoned PD until a final development plan has public hearing, notice of which has been given as provided or. been approved. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code Section 17.70.030. Amendments shall be limited to chanpc-. 9204.4(E)) in the sire and position of buildings; the number, arra tit configuration of lots; landscape treatment; phasing, aril the 17.62.060 Final development plan. like. A. Within six months of approval of conditional approval of C. Amendments may not includechattges ici proposed ,,,e the development plan, the applicant shall file with the overall density, or overall configuration es the land seduseand Community Development Department a final development circulation feaWes. Changes to these m aspects ay be plan. At his discretion acid for good cause, the Director may accomplished only by reapplication and submittal of a new extend for six months the period for filing. preliminary development plan. B. The final development plan shall include those items from D. Tbee procedures apply whether or not all or parr e1 the Section 17.62.010 (PretimWary development plan) which development bas been built. (Ord.941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior describe the proposal, including division of land, type and code 9204.4.(H)) location of all buildings and improvements. and so on, but it need not include information on existing conditions. 17.62890 Revocation of PD zoning. C. The Director shall review add take action on the final If a final development plan is not carried out in the time development plan within 30 days of filing. He shall approve specified in the development plan or widtin an approved it upon finding that it is in substantia) compliance with the extension period, the Planning Commission and Council may P+eliminaty development plan as approved or modified by the remove the PD designation according to the usual procedurc Council. Upon approval of the final development plain, the for city-initiated rezoning. (Ord. 941 - 2 (part), 1982: prior Director shall add the number of the planned development to code 9204.4(1)) the official sone map (for example, PD (9999)). Subsequently, all grading, construction and landscaping sural! comply with the approved final development plan. D. The final development plan may consist of final subdivision maps. bW&g 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 determore the extent to whirr any additional documentation of development plans is required. (Ord. 941 - I (part), 1982: prior code-9204.4(F)) 17.62.070 Phasing. If the construction of the planned development is to occur in ALM, the open space and common facilities shall be developed and made available in proportion to the dumber of dwelling units or nonresidential floor area occupied during any given stage. At no time during consmrction of the project shall the density of developed land exceed the overall density established in the final development plan. (Ord. 941 - 1 put), 1982: prior code-9204.4(G)) 3-15 72 i Acacia Creek.PD Overlay EXHIBIT 3=16 lar-08-99 11 :26A West-pi 805 8 8821 P . 0.1* ind Use Element SLO General Plan C. Medical services should be near the hospitals. D. Government social services and the regional offices of state and federal agencies should be near the intersections of South Higuera Street, Prado Road, and Highway 101 (Figure 5); 'E. Large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having no substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development zoning application. F. Certain business and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, veterinarians, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. 3.3.3 Offices Outside Designated Areas Existing office buildings outside the areas described in policy 3.3.2 may continue to be used and may have minor expansions if they: A. Have access directly from collector or arterial streets, not local residential streets; B. Will not significantly increase traffic in residential areas; C. Will not have significant adverse impacts on nearby uses. 3.3.4 Building Conservation Historic or architecturally significant buildings located in Office districts should be conserved, not replaced. 3.3.3 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.5. 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 projects realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are r 'ded in Office districts, they shall not exceed 12 units per acre. So long as the fl. _. area ratio is not exceeded, the maximum residential density may be developed in addition to nonresidential development on a site. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) 3-17 Acacia Creek PD Overlay EXIMIT C 3 :18 Mar-08-99 12 :23P Westp Bob 98 8821 PAW L C3 A 88-97 Page 4 1. The applicant shall complete a Phase If environmental site assessment to,, confirm that any contamination issues have been adequately addressed prior to site development. Accurate delineation of site contamination and resolution of all contamination issues prior to construction must be accomplished to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. m. The new building shall incorporate facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. n. If significant archaeological materials are discovered during grading and construction, all construction activities that may damage those materials shall immediately cease. The project sponsor shall then propose specific mitigation based on a qualified archaeologist's recommendations. The Director shall approve, approve with changes, or reject the mitigation proposal (if found incomplete, infeasible, or unlikely to reduce adverse impacts to an acceptable level). If the proposal is approved, the project sponsor shall implement mitigation, to the satisfaction of the Director. A copy of the archaeologist's recommendations and the Director's decision will be forwarded to the Cultural Heritage Committee. Conditions 1. An administrative use permit will be required for any uses proposing habitable floor space at the mezzanine level. Use permits for development of mezzanine areas as habitable floor space will only be approved with the assurance that adequate parking exists to serve the new square footage. Use of the mezzanine level for storage may be allowed subject to meeting parking requirements. 2. The following is a list of allowed and conditionally allowed uses at the site: Allowed Uses: • Advertising& related services(graphic design, writing, mailing, addressing, etc.) • Auto repair & related services (body, brake, transmissions, muffler shops: painting,etc.) • Auto sound system installation • Broadcast studios • Building and landscape maintenance services • Caretaker's quarters • Catering services • Computer services • Construction activities -19 • Contractors- all types of general and special building contractor's offi Mar-08-99 12: 24P Wasti 80! 198 8821 P , 0 ; L Li A 88-97 Page 5 • Contractor's yards • Credit reporting and collection • Delivery and private postal services • Detective and security services • Equipment rental • Exterminators and fumigators • Feed stores and farm supply sales • Government agency corporation yards • Laboratories(medical,analytical research) • Laundry/dry cleaners -cleaning plant -pick-up point • Offices(engineering)engineers,architects,and industrial design • Photocopy services -quick printers • Photofinishing- retail • Photofinishing-wholesale,and blueprinting and microfilming services • Photographic studios • Post offices and public and private postal services . • Printing and publishing • Repairservices -small household appliances, locksmith,seamstress,shoe repair -large appliance,electrical equipment power tools,saw sharpening • Research &development-services, software,consumer products, instruments,office equipment and similar items, and related light chemical processing • Retail sales - appliances, furniture and furnishings, musical instruments, processing equipment, business, office and medical equipment stores, catalog stores,sporting goods,outdoor supply. • Retail sales - auto parts and accessories except tires and batteries as principal use • Retail sales-tires and batteries • Retail sales and repair of bicycles • Utility Companies -Corporation yards • Vending machines(See Section 17.08.050) • Warehousing,mini-storage,moving companies • Water treatment services • Wholesale and mail order houses Uses Allowed by Directors Approval of an Administrative Use Permit: • Athletic and health clubs,fitness centers, game courts • Antennas(commercial broadcasting) • Banks and savings and loans(branch office only- no headquarters) 3-20 Mar-08-99 12 : 24P Westi. 80E 98 8821 P . i t L ebb A 88-97 Page 6 • Barbers, hairstylists,manicurists,tanning centers • Bowling alleys • Cabinet and carpentry shops • Day care-day care center • Gas distributors-containerized(butane, propane,oxygen, acetylene,etc.) • Laundry/drycleaners -self-service • Manufacturing-food, beverages;ice; apparel;electronic,optical, instrumentation products; jewelry;musical instruments-,sporting goods;art materials • Organizations(professional,religious,political,labor,fraternal,trade,youth,etc.) offices and meeting rooms • Restaurants,sandwich shops,take-out food,etc.with a maximum of 2,000 square feet of floor area • Retail sales - indoor sales of building materials and gardening supplies (floorand wall coverings,paint,glass stores,etc.) • Schools -business,trade,recreational,or other specialized schools • Secretarial& related services(court reporting,stenography,typing,telephone answering, eta) • Tattoo Parlors • Temporarysales • Temporary uses-not otherwise listed • Ticket/travel agencies Utility companies -engineering&administration offices • Veterinarians Future applications for use permits shall be subject to the rules and regulations in effect at the time of application. My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. If you have any questions,please call Pam Ricci at 781-7168. Sincerely, cc: Steve Pults,AIA 1401 Higuera Street SLO, CA 93401 Ro ald Whise nd Heirs of Helen Jones Hearing Officer 713 Rancho Drive SLO, CA 93401 3-21 Acacia Creek PD Overlay E B,IT D 3-22 LIST OF AVAII.ABLE PROPERTIES (Received from Stafford O McCarty,Commercial Real Estate) Address of Property Description Rates and Prices For Lease-Retail. Once&Industrial Snace 641 Nrguera,SLO 1,000 to 4,814 sl..Professional Office $1.35 sf.NNN 102&104 Santa Rosa,SLO 1,408 sf.Professional Office $1.65 sfJGross 4ased) 807 W.Main St,Santa Maria 5,750 sf.Industrial Building $0.30 sf.NNN 700 W.Orange,Santa Maria 40,602 sf.Industrial Space $029 s.f.NNN 1330 W.Main SL,Santa Maria 3,016 s£Office Space $0.85 s£NNN 1158 W.Beueravia,Santa Maria 12,000 s£Commercial/Retail $0.65 s£ NNN 2021 Broad SL,SLO Beauty Salon,approx.900 sf. $1,500/mo Gross(leased) LIST OF AVAR ABLE PROPERTIES (Received from Sem Commercial&Investment Real Estate) Property Sq.Ft Price Remarks Office&Retail 4115 Broad St(Creekside) 10,613 $1.10 s.£Net A+quality offices.Fully wired In the county 467 hill Street 9,000+/- $595,000 KSBY TV Building(for sale) 3165 Broad(Crossroads) 1,900 2,000/mo Net Vacant-office or retail(for sale) LIST OF AVAII ABLE PROPERTIES (Received from Rossetti Company) Address Sq.Ft S/SF NNN/Gross Remarks 2945 McMillan Road 3,000-9,545 1.03 Gross High tech project good lig 950 Foothill Blvd 350-1200 1.20 NNN University Square 553 Iiiguera 2,600 1.10 NNN Ground floor Higuera Street Frontage w/parldng 811 Palm Street 2,920-$3,000/mo Gross Second floor office space May be divided 2021 Broad Street 900 1.30 NNN Previously The Silk Rose Salon on Comer of Broad and Sanderoock 3442 Empresa Dr 1,753 .90 Gross Office space included 420 SF of roll up door warehouse space 4211 Broad St 880 1.00 Gross Ground floor office with covered parking 3-23 8:23:44 To: Owner / Mark ng Director, WITH 2 BILLION DOLLARS IN SALES OVER THE INTERNET, CAN YOU AFFORD NOT TO SELL YOUR PRODUCTS ON THE NET? If your company has products or If your firm is accepted into our free web V services for sole... program, your site will be state-of-the-art, incorporating e-commerce and shopping cart MIf you can offer these products or technology. services to customers outside your local yellow page area... We work from your existing materials and �� your site will be reviewed and approved by We would like to invite your company you. Lto hove a Free Web Site developed by This offer is limited to the number of 0 one of our interns, as well as free company E-Commerce Sites our Interns are capable domain name registration. of producing. Yes Free... Cyber Graphics Institute will not perform so that we may assign projects, to our services for companies involved with Interns who ore recent graduates from the pornography, or other practices deemed as Ft. Lauderdale Art Institute for our newest unscrupulous. • course: E Commerce and Shopping Cart TOLL FREE AND NO 00LtGAT1ON: Technology. Please fax this form back to 1-888-437-1388 = or toll for more information at 1-888-254-7757. �- At Cyber Graphics Institute we train You will hear from an Institute Representative designers and programmers in advanced immediately. Thank you. m web site design and programming. COMPANY NAME Our interns ore graduates from the Ft. OoNtAci Lauderdale Art Institute, with degrees in -- --_�---__� Graphic Arts, who ore now working on PMoNt # their Advanced Web Master certificate. ( ) FAX # In order to participate in our Free { ) Web Site offer, you must: DOMAIN NAME SEARCH - Fill out the Internet address you would like us to research for 1 . Be able to sell your product or availability. (Twenty two characters maximum - service outside your local yellow page not including '.corn', no spaces, hyphens may area. be used.) * 1. — _ 2.Allow the Intem to utilize your site in 0 his/her portfolio. 2' V3.Host your site on our high-speed W servers for the first year, during thelfyou don't wa»ttoreceive our faxaa,write start-up period. your fax number below ( ) and fox to 1-888.097-1988 Cvrz n / a,*1 'c c u ;e 0 t i t.t o 102 NE 2nd Street x270 C 1-6f38-2547757 riz:ess www.cybergraphicsinstitute.com Baca Raton, Fl.33432 \ 1.886-497-1 US Fax 3-24 Cq 1 S - N city of san tuis oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 March 15, 1999 Hamish Marshall Acacia Creek, LLC 1880 Santa Barbara Avenue,Suite F San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: PD and ER 201-98- 3450 Broad Street Request to change the official zoning map from C-S (Service Commercial) to C-S-PD (Service-Commercial, Planned Development) to allow professional offices in a commercialfwarehouse building, and environmental review. Dear Mr. Marshall: The Planning Commission,at its meeting of March 10, 1999, recommended that the City Council adopt the mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact, and amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S to C-S-S-PD, based on findings and subject to conditions noted in the attached resolution. The action of the Planning Commission is a recommendation to the City Council and, therefore, is not final. This matter has been tentatively scheduled for public hearing before the City Council on April 6, 1999. This date, however, should be verified with the City Clerk's office(805)781-7102. If you have any questions,please contact Pam Ricci at(805)781-7168. Sincerely, Ron d G. Whisenand Development Review Manager cc: SLO County Assessor's Office Acacia Creek, LLC 555 Ramona Drive SLO, CA 93405 ATTACHMENT 4 3-25 The CAy of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services. Programs and activitiese& Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5251-99 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo did conduct a public hearing in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on March 10, 1999, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application PD and ER 201-98, Acacia Creek, LLC, applicant. ITEM REVIEWED: ER and PD 201-98: Request to change the official zoning map from C-S (Service Commercial) to C-S-PD (Service-Commercial, Planned Development) to allow professional offices in a commercial/warehouse building, and environmental review. DESCRIPTION: On file in the office of Community Development Department, City Hall. GENERAL LOCATION: 3450 Broad 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 project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area. 2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential zones. 3. The project, which is a PD rezoning to allow some large offices at the site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise, light and glare, and loss of privacy, among others, imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas. 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. 3-26 Resolution No. 5251-99 PD and ER 201-98 Page 2 6. The project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on government office locations,with the recommended condition that the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program should be located in either the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue, and is not an appropriate use at this outlying commercial site that is completely detached from other governmental services. 7. A Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on January 12, 1999, which describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment subject to the mitigation measures shown in the attached initial study ER 201-98 being incorporated into the project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council, approval of the proposal, subject to the following conditions: 1. A maximum of 39,000 gross square feet of floor space in the existing buildings on the site may be occupied by professional office uses. 2. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in the zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply. The list of uses approved through Use Permit A 88-97 shall continue to apply, with the amendments imposed through this PD approval allowing large offices with some restrictions. 3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single professional office tenant may occupy less than 2500 square feet of adjacent, interconnected floor area. 4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,medical clinics,doctors offices, and lawyers offices. 5. Mezzanine additions to existing tenant spaces within the building are prohibited to keep a balance between floor space provided in the building and available on-site parking spaces. This condition nullifies and supersedes Condition No. 1 of Use Permit A 88-97. 3-27 Resolution No. 5251-99 PD and ER 201-98 Page 3 6. No mixed use and/or shared parking reductions shall be allowed at the site. 7. Cuesta Title, or any other title company that locates at the site in the future, shall maintain a customer service office, such as an escrow office, elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories where there is not the restriction on customer visitations. 8. The proposed use of the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program is not allowed because it has been determined to be a type of government office use with a close functional relationship to the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue. However, other government agencies not functionally related to general government, social services, or health care operations,as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1 may be allowed at the site through the approval of an administrative use permit where it can be demonstrated that there is limited need for public visitation. The Hearing Office may refer these requests to the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General Plan consistency issues. 9. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional traffic impact fees to be paid prior to issuance of building permits for the tenant improvements. A credit shall be given for those traffic impact fees already paid with the shell building permit(based on a C-S zone commercialtwarehouse). 10. Bicycle Parking: The applicant shall provide additional short- and long-term parking for bicycles as follows: • Relocate the rack shown adjacent to the BFGC Architects tenant space to be in front of the unallocated tenant space, and install an additional rack (for two bicycles) near the main entrance to the BFGC space (possibly to the right of the entry). • Install an additional rack (for four bicycles) on the north side of the building near the main entry to the space where the County of SLO Drug Rehab was proposed. • On all plans submitted for tenant improvements for each of the proposed tenant spaces, clearly identify the lockable rooms that will be reserved for employee bicycle storage consistent with standards of the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. 3-28 Resolution No. 5251-99 PD and ER 201-98 Page 4 11. Transit Stop: The applicant has requested relocation of the existing transit stop at Capitolio Way and Broad Street to accommodate the proposed County Regional Center. This is agreeable to staff, contingent upon approval of the design by the City's Transit Manager and approval of any requisite encroachment permit by Caltrans. If pursued by the applicant, the facility shall include a transit turnout, shelter, lighting and a trash receptacle along the property's Broad Street frontage, north of Acacia Creek. The foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo on motion by Commissioner Jeffrey, seconded by Commissioner Peterson, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Jeffrey, Peterson, Loh, Whittlesey, Ready and Cooper NOES: None REFRAIN: Commr. Senn ABSENT: None Arnold B. Jonas, Secretary Planning Commission 3-29 Draft Planning Commission h. is March 10, 1999 Page 2 April 27, 1999—Tentative ARC/Planning Commission/City Council Meeting. April 28, 1999—KSBY Hill St. Use Permit, DeVaul Tract,and Wisen Specific/General Plan Amendment for the Airport Area B. Commission: Chairman Senn reported the second Margarita annexation, the Gearhart PD, and the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance was recently approved by Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 3450 Broad Street: Request to change the official zoning map from C-S (Service- Commercial)to C-S-PD(Service-Commercial,Planned Development)to allow professional offices in a commercial/warehouse building,and environmental review; Acacia Creek,LLC,applicant. (PD 201-98) Chairman Senn refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest; a source of his income would be materially affected by the decision of this item. Assoc. Planner Ricci presented the staff report and recommended reviewing the initial study of environmental impact and recommending approval of the amendment to the City Council based on findings and with conditions. Commissioner Jeffrey asked staff if Condition 7 could be less specific and suggested changing the"Cuesta Title"reference to"any title co.use." Atty. Trujillo replied yes. Commissioner Whittlesey suggested including with Condition 5 a reason why mezzanines are prohibited, such as"to keep a balance with the floor space and parking ratio." Commissioner Cooper asked for comment on including results from the Feb. 24 Commercial Zoning Workshop. Assoc. Planner Ricci doesn't believe any direct workshop conclusions would apply to this project. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if there is a tracking mechanism for available C-S and M land. Assoc. Planner Ricci stated in 1994 the Land Use Element (LUE) was reviewed/adopted and an inventory completed. It may be time for an update with the number of recent annexations. Commissioner Loh asked for comment on creek restoration/protection. ATTACHMENT 5 3-30 Draft Planning Commission Mn. March 10, 1999 Page 3 Assoc. Planner Ricci stated as part of the project.construcfion, fairly extensive landscaping is required in the creek area and there is an open-space easement over the area which encompasses the bike trail and riparian area. Each Commissioner disclosed they had conversations with Mr. Marshall. Commissioner Cooper asked why Condition 12 is optional. Assoc. Planner Ricci commented on the enforcement difficulties associated with Condition 12. Atty.Trujillo noted monitoring through business license applications could be utilized. There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was opened. PUBLIC CONEKENT: Hamish Marshall, Westpac Investments, stated the Acacia Creek project was designed with many amenities including excess parking, picnic areas, a bike trail, and an office front. Tenancy was unknown when designed. He noted that certain office tenants, such as engineers, architects, etc., are already allowed at the site as long as there is adequate parking. He pointed out that they comply with all five findings for the PD overlay and the General Plan, and that they are not requesting any further Parking reductions for mixed uses or shared parking. He displayed a list of available city office space and commented on the need for more large office sites. He commented that the project would not be setting a precedent because it was consistent with surrounding developments. He explained that major renovations to Broad and Sacramento St would be completed with the project. He concluded by noting that a comprehensive traffic study was done, and that a bus stop, approved by Caltrans and the City, is specifically being installed for Tri-Counties Regional Center and will help cut down on traffic. Vice Chair Ready asked if there are any problems with the conditions presented by staff. Mr. Marshall believed Condition 12 is unnecessary because their leases state subletting is prohibited. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if there could be greater intensity of use under a straight C-S Zone, as opposed to the requested C-S with a PD Overlay. Mr.Marshall replied yes. Commissioner Whittlesey asked for comment on the Tri-Counties medical component. Mr. Marshall stated there would not be a medical component.. Phil DTri-Counties Regional Center, SLO mgr., distributed a brochure and stated they are a private industry doing social service/case management for persons with developmental disabilities. He explained that the medical component is a written developmental evaluation 3-31 Draft Planning Commissio, lutes March 10, 1999 Page 4 administered to approximately six patients/wk. He noted that they've been in the city for 30 Years and have provided services to approximately 1,500 consumers and employee 21 staff members. He stated that they are basically a telephone operation, with most of their work in the field, and that the transit stop will allow people direct access for evaluations/counseling. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if the facility on Phillips Ln. will remain. Mr. Dauterman answered no, explaining that they've been on Phillips Ln. for 19 years and need to expand to a larger site. . Commissioner Jeffrey asked if speech/physical/occupational therapy will be provided on site. Mr. Dauterman replied no. Tom Morell. Cuesta Title, stated it's his impression that the City has been consistent in allowing large office uses in the C-S Zone with a PD overlay, provided the offices have a minimum of 2,500 s.f.. He noted that he has spent several months looking for a location and the primary reason for wanting to move out to Acacia Creek is because of the type of business they conduct and the office use they have. He indicated that Cuesta Title has been in town 34 years and currently has 7 county branch offices. He added that the main Pacific St. office supports all branch offices with title information, computer services & administration, noting that they have 24 employees and 8 parking spaces. He felt that the City should address making office space available to prospective tenants and that the C-S zoning/matrix weaknesses should be reviewed. Commissioner Jeffrey asked if there is a plan to encourage ride sharing at this new location. Mr. Morell believes the shower feature will encourage employees to bike to work. Commissioner Whittlesey asked for comment on Condition 7. Mr. Morell feels Condition 7 if fine, but believes the term "customer service office" should be change dto"escrow office." Tom Patterson, Patterson Realty, project leasing agent/developer, stated the PD overlay request came about because of a demand demonstrated by community large office users. He believed that overlays allow desired established businesses to stay within our community, and noted his support of the PD request Mark Anderson, Rosetti Co. leasing agent, noted that he represents Tri-Counties in their search for new office space, and that there is a lack of appropriately zoned sites for large office space. He stressed that Tri-Counties can wait for a new facility to be built within an appropriately zone area, move into the airport area in the county, move out of the city limits, or move into Acacia Creek with a PD. He concluded by stating that the zoning ordinance allows for the Commission to approve PDs for large offices, and, given the scarcities of such properties, this request should be granted. 3-32 Draft Planning Commission Mi, March 10, 1999 Page 5 Seeing no further speakers come forward,the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENT: Commissioner Jeffrey moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the amendment to the city's zoning man designation from C-S-S to C-S-S-PD based on the findings and conditions with (1) the deletion of Condition 12. (2) rewording Condition 7 to reflect that Cuesta Title or any other title company shall maintain a customer service office such as an escrow office elsewhere in the city in traditional office zoning categories where there is not the restriction on customer visitations,and(3)rewording Condition 5 to reflect the mezzanine additions to existing tenant spaces within the buildiMare prohibited to keep a balance between building floor space and available on-site parking. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Peterson Commissioner Loh referred to Mr. Marshall's letter dated 1-20-99 and suggested noting the request of 69%of office space instead of 80%. Assoc. Planner Ricci stated the cap of 39,000 s.f. was included to be consistent with the one parking space for each 300 square feet of floor area ratio required for professional offices. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if all the findings need to be met. Assoc.Planner Ricci replied yes,all five. Commissioner Loh had Jim Hanson of the Public Works Department review the traffic analysis, neighborhood traffic impacts,and the extension of the left-tum pocket on southbound Broad St. AYES: Commissioners Jeffrey,Peterson, Loh, Whittlesey, Cooper,and Vice Chair Ready NOES: None REFRAIN: None The motion carried 6-0. Chairman Senn refiained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest. 2. 1100 Monterey Street: Request for a variance to allow off-site parking at 1243 Monterey Street,a distance greater than 300 feet from the proposed office use; C-R Zone;Dr. Larry Newman, applicant. Chairman Senn refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest; he represents a client who is a partner to this project. Assoc. Planner Ricci presented the staff report and recommend denying the variance based on recommended findings. 3-33 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT rrEM#i BY: Pam Ricci,Associate Planner ff�. MEETING DATE: March 10, 1999 FROM: Ron Whisenand,Development Review Manage FILE NUMBER: ER/PD 201-98 PROJECT ADDRESS: 3450 Broad Street SUBJECT: Request to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service- Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located on the east side of Broad Street,north of Capitolio Way. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council,based on findings,and with conditions. BACKGROUND Situation The new Acacia Creek Commercial building is nearing completion of construction. The project proposes to add the Planned Development(PD) overlay zoning to the site to enable large office tenants.The Planning Co**+ mssion reviews zoning amendments and makes a recommendation to the City Council,which takes a final action on such requests. City Council adopted amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Regulations in March 1987 that allowed some large offices in the C-S and M zones with the approval of a planned development rezoning. The enabling ordinance was adopted because the existing office zones did not provide adequate room to accommodate the number of large (over 2,500 square feet) offices expected to need space within the City (Office Supply and Demand Study, Quad Engineering, 1986). The proposed PD overlay zoning is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 3.3.2 E,which states that large offices,with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having limited need for client visits or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and Manufacturing districts,subject to approval of a Planned Development(PD)zoning application. Previous Review On February 10, 1999, the Commission initially considered the request. On a 5-1-1 vote (Commr. Jeffrey voting no; Chairperson Senn refrained from participating due to a potential conflict of interest), the Commission continued action on the requested rezoning to a date specific (March 10, 1999) following the commercial zoning workshop on February 2J 1134 ATTACHMENT 6 PD 201-98 Page 2 with detailed direction to staff and the applicant. Data Summary Applicant: Acacia Creek LLC,A Limited Liability Representative: WestPac Investments,Imc. Existing Zoning: C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning Proposed Zoning: C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings General Plan Land Use Designation: Services&Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures was recommended by the Development Review Manager on January 12, 1999. Final action on the initial study will be taken by the City Council. Project Action Deadline: Legislative actions not subject to processing deadlines. Site Description The site contains 3.7 acres and is currently in the process of being developed with a new, approximately 48,000 square-foot, commercial building, parking areas, bicycle path and landscaping. The property has frontage on both Broad Street and Sacramento Drive. Acacia Creek crosses the site in the northwestern corner. Significant vegetation includes a number of trees near the creek The project site is currently zoned C-S-S, Service Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, as are the properties to the direct north. Properties to the east and south are either zoned M, Manufacturing, or M-S, Manufacturing with the Special Consideration overlay zoning. The sites to the west across Broad Street are undeveloped and located outside the City limits. There are residential properties to the further northwest. EVALUATION At its meeting on February 10, 1999, the Planning Commission asked staff to respond to the following items in the report prepared for the continued project: 1. Commission Direction: Provide further discussion of tragic issues, including the potential need for a tragic signal at the intersection of Broad Street and Capitolto Way. Staff's Response: Attached to this report is a memo from the Public Works Department which analyzes the potential impacts of the PD overlay zoning on traffic generation. Assuming the maximum potential for professional office space in the building based on proposed conditions of approval, the conclusion is that the worst case scenario would be an increase of 10 vehicles per hour(yph). 3-35 PD 201-98 Page 3 The memo indicates that this increase is not significant enough to alter the conclusions of the adopted traffic report for the project that was endorsed by the City and Caltrans. In terms of the need for a traffic signal at Broad and Capitolio, Public Works and Caltrans note that one, but not all,of the requisite warrants are met to trigger its installation. This means that a signal may be needed in the future, but that its installation is not directly tied to this project. However, a mitigation measure was required with the approval of site development plans that required the extension of the left-tum pocket on south-bound Broad to accommodate added traffic generation. The precise location of an additional traffic signal in the vicinity is also not known. It may be preferred at the proposed new intersection of the Prado Road extension through the Margarita expansion area(Margarita Specific Plan)at Broad Street which is located about halfway between Capitolio & Industrial. The applicant is required to pay traffic impact fees which are earmarked to pay for future traffic improvements in the area,including a traffic signal in the vicinity. 2. Commission Direction: Consider the addition of a condition which prohibits mezzanine additions with approval of the PD zoning to allow large offices. StaWs Response: Condition No. 5 has been added to note the restriction on mezzanine additions which effectively limits the building to the current ground floor totals under construction. 3. Commission Direction: Look at placing restrictions on the ability for businesses to intense through sub-leases. Staffs Response: Normally, staff would not endorse instituting a condition that limited a main tenant from sub- leasing part of their floor area to another allowed tenant or business. Such a condition could increase potential enforcement cases, and also appears to be micro-managing businesses to a degree beyond the typical restrictions imposed by conditions of approval. Since the motivation for the potential restriction appears to be related to keeping available on-site parking in line with the amount of space in the building and expected parking demand, staff would point out that there are already several other conditions that address this specific concern. These conditions include prohibiting mezzanines, limiting the total amount of professional office space in the building, and as discussed below, the addition of a condition that prolubits this site from qualifying for either further mixed use or shared parking reductions. While staff does not feel that an additional condition is imperative given the number of other restrictions proposed, Optional Condition No. 12 is offered which notes that one tenant only may occupy individual suites within the building. This condition could be monitored through Planning staff when potential occupants submit for a City business tax certificate. 3-36 PD 201-98 Page 4 4. Commission Direction: Provide an analysis of desirability of concurrent consideration of a speck project with evaluation of the proposed PD rezoning. Stairs Response: The issue stems from a literal interpretation of a sentence from SLO Municipal Code Section 17.50.010, the Purpose and application section of the Planned Development (PD) Zone, which states: "...PD rezoning must occur simultaneously with approval of a specific project ..." The project being reviewed now is the addition of the"PD"overlay zoning to the site. Evaluation of the subject request should be focused on land use and the question of whether the site is suitable for the establishment of large offices, consistent with the Land Use Element and the zoning regulations. The section allowing large offices to be established through the PD overlay was added to the Planned Development zone section in 1987. It is highlighted as a separate section with its own unique findings. This differentiates the use of the PD to establish large offices from the traditional application of the PD zone which is to grant exceptions to different development standards to protect resources and to the encourage creative designs. The sentence in the purpose under question relates directly to those types of situations where the exceptions to standards are intrinsic to the review of the development plan. Hence,the need for concurrent processing of the PD overlay with the proposed development plan. In practice,this requirement of concurrent processing has not been transferred to large office PD requests. Since there is not necessarily a direct relationship between the establishment of offices and the development plan review, several other notable large offices PDs were requested after projects were built including the Brickyard and Westwind Business Park. 5. Commission Direction: Clam the availability and limitations of bus service to the site. Staffs Response: A Route 3 transit stop with bus turnout and shelter has been approved at the north end of the project site on the other side of the bridge. The design of the stop has been approved by both Caltrans and the City. The stop is being relocated from the vacant Williams BrothersNons site further to the south. The route currently operates on 1-hour intervals. There is the potential for a change to half-hour intervals with planned system improvements. 6. Commission Direction: Recommend a condition that there be no mixed use andlor shared parking reductions allowed at the site with the approval of the PD zoning to allow large offices. 3-37 PD 201-98 Page 5 Staffs Response: Condition No. 6 has been added to note the restriction. 7. Commission Direction: Clark the restrictions that would be imposed on the establishment of a title plant at the site to insure its consistency with large office restrictions. Staff's Response: LUE Policies 3.32 E.&3.5.2 F. both stipulate that `large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having limited need for client visits or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development(PD) zoning application." The Commission expressed concerns that the Cuesta Title plant may not fully comply with these restrictions,and that additional conditions on the use to assure their consistency may be necessary. Condition No. 7 is now recommended which would require Cuesta Title to maintain a customer service office elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories where there is not the restriction on customervisitations. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed amendment, based on inconsistency with the general plan. Planning Commission action is final unless appealed to the City Council. 2. Continue review of the amendment with specific direction to the applicant and staff. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMNmNTS Other departments were consulted regarding the land use change. Specific requirements from other departments have been incorporated as conditions of planned development approval. RECOMN EIENDATION Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the amendment to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings to the City Council, based on findings, and with conditions. 3-38 PD 201-98 Page 6 Findin 1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area. 2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential zones. 3. The project, which is a PD rezoning to allow some large offices at the site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise,light and glare,and loss of privacy,among others,imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas. 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. 6. The project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on government office locations, with the recommended condition that the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program should be located in either the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue, and is not an appropriate use at this outlying commercial site that is completely detached from other governmental services. 7. A Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on January 12, 1999, which describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment subject to the mitigation measures shown in the attached initial study ER 201-98 being incorporated into the project. Conditions 1. A maximum of 39,000 gross square feet of floor space in the existing buildings on the site may be occupied by professional office uses. 2. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in the zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply. The list of uses approved through Use Permit A 88-97 shall continue to apply, with the amendments imposed through this PD approval allowing large offices with some restrictions. 3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single professional office tenant may occupy less than 2500 square feet of adjacent,interconnectedfloor area 4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,medical clinics,doctors offices,and lawyers offices. 3-39 PD 201-98 Page 7 5. Mezzanine additions to existing tenant spaces within the building are prohibited. This condition nullifies and supersedes Condition No. 1 of Use Permit A 88-97. 6. No mixed use and/or shared parking reductions shall be allowed at the site. 7. Cuesta Title shall maintain a customer service office elsewhere in the City in traditional office zoning categories where there is not the restriction on customer visitations. 8. The proposed use of the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program is not allowed because it has been determined to be a type of government office use with a close functional relationship to the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue. However, other government agencies not functionally related to general government,social services,or health care operations,as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1 may be allowed at the site through the approval of an administrative use permit where it can be demonstrated that there is limited need for public visitation. The Hearing Office may refer these requests to the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General Plan consistency issues. 9. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional traffic impact fees to be paid prior to issuance of building permits for the tenant improvements. A credit shall be given for those traffic impact fees already paid with the shell building permit (based on a C-S zone commercial/warehouse). 10. Bicycle Parldag: The applicant shall provide additional short- and long-tens parking for bicycles as follows: • Relocate the rack shown adjacent to the BFGC Architects tenant space to be in front of the unallocated tenant space, and install an additional rack (for two bicycles) near the main entrance to the BFGC space (possibly to the right of the entry). • Install an additional rack (for four bicycles) on the north side of the building near the main entry to the space where the County of SLO Drug Rehab was proposed. • On all plans submitted for tenant improvements for each of the proposed tenant spaces, clearly identify the lockable rooms that will be reserved for employee bicycle storage consistent with standards of the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. 11. Transit Stop: The applicant has requested relocation of the existing transit stop at Capitolio Way and Broad Street to accommodate the proposed County Regional Center. This is agreeable to staff, contingent upon approval of the design by the City's Transit Manager and approval of any requisite encroachment permit by Caltrans. If pursued by the applicant, the facility shall include a transit turnout, shelter, lighting and a trash receptacle along the property's Broad Street frontage,north of Acacia Creek. 3-40 PD 201-98 Page 8 Optional Condition 12. Only one tenant or business may occupy individual suites within the building. Attached: 2-10-99 Planning Commission follow-up letter&Draft Minutes Memos from Public works dated 2-25-99&3-3-99 2-10-99 Planning Commission staff report 3-41 of sAn luis oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 February 17, 1999 Acacia Creek, LLC Hamish Marshall 555 Ramona Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: PD and ER 201-98 3450 Broad Street Request to change the official zoning map from CSS (Service- Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning) to CSS- PD (Service-Commercial with Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings) to allow professional offices in a commercialtwarehouse building, and environmental review. Dear Hamish: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of October 28, 1998, continued the above project, with direction given as noted below. The matter has been placed on the Commission's March 10, 1999 agenda. 1. Provide further discussion of traffic issues, including the potential need for a traffic signal at the intersection of Broad Street and Capitolio Way; 2. Consider the addition of a condition which prohibits mezzanine additions with approval of the PD zoning to allow large offices; 3. Look at placing restrictions on the ability for businesses to intensify through sub- leases; 4. Provide an analysis of the desirability of concurrent consideration of a specific project with evaluation of the proposed PD rezoning; 5. Clarify the availability and limitations of bus service to the site; 6. Recommend a condition that there be no mixed use and/or shared parking reductions allowed at the site with the approval of the PD zoning to allow large offices; and 3-42 EJThe%y of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications!)suite for the Deaf(605) 787-7470. ER=PD 201-98 Page 2 7. Clarify the restrictions that.Would be imposed on the establishment of a tide plant at the site to insure its consistency with large office restrictions. If you have any questions, please contact.Pam Ricci.at 781-7168. Sincerely-, Ronald Whisenand Development Review Manager cc: Acacia Creek, LLC 1880 Santa Barbara.Avenue, Suite F San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3=43 Draft Planning Commission Mv..dhes February 10, 1999 Page 7 Commissioner Jeffrey requested the motion be amended so that Finding 2 would exhibit the five additional uses. Commissioner Cooper acoepted the amendment to the motion Commissioner Jeffirev requested the motion be amended to include a Condition 14 to require a second ingress/egress to this site to facilitate circulation and to ensure adequate access in case of emergency to the determination by Public Works Commissioner Cooper accepted the amendment to the motion Commissioner Peterson questioned staff on requirements of bicycle parking. He felt that because of the adjacency of the bike path, additional bicycle parking might be needed. Chairman Senn felt that, because of the magnitude of this project, additional input should be received from manufacturing associations, the.City's Economic Development Director, and the Chamber of Commerce. The general plan contains language relative to making certain there is adequate land for industrial and commercial service uses before it is taken out He said he likes the physical modifications to the building and feels the change in uses is probably good, but he cannot support the request He's concerned on the impact this project may have on the downtown area. He felt once this is taken out of its current use, nothing else comparable will be built because it's economically prohibitive. He said he has not been persuaded of the compatibility. AYES: Comms. Cooper, Jeffrey, Loh, and Peterson NOES: Commissioner Ready and Chairman Senn ABSTAIN: None The motion carried 4-2. Commissioner Whittlesey was absent. 2. 3450 Broad Street: Request to change the official zoning map from C-S (Service- Commercial) to C-S-PD (Service-Commercial, Planned Development) to allow professional offices in a commercial/warehouse building, and environmental review; Acacia Creek, LLC, applicant- Chairman pplicantChairman Senn refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest. Vice- Chairman Ready presided over the hearing. Pam Rica presented the staff report and recommended that the Commission review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council, based on findings and subject to conditions. Commr. Cooper asked if there is a concern of creating a quadra-polar area in light of the tri-polar concept. 3-44 Draft Planning Commission Mwutes February 10, 1999 Page 8 Pam Ricci stated the tri-polar concept specifically relates to governmental offices and not offices in general. Commr. Peterson asked for comments on transit service available for uses that will be located at this site. Pam Ricci stated the Tri-Counties Regional Center, which provides training for disabled adults, has specifically requested a transit facility on site. The Public Works Department has preliminarily approved a transit stop design that would be located just above the creek and the bridge. This will need Caltrans approval. There is currently a bus stop on Broad Street further to the south that will be relocated to this site. Commr. Jeffrey suggested including "proposed" in the first bullet on Page 8 in reference to the County of SLO Drug Rehab tenant space. He added the Tri-Counties Regional has a medical component which provides therapy and examinations and asked if that aspect will be moved to this location as well. Ms. Ricci deferred the question to the applicant. Commr. Ready questioned how staff will address and enforce the prospect of unapproved/prohibited aspects of uses such as the medical component of the Tri- Counties Regional Center. Ms. Ricci stated the Cuesta Title use description indicates that they still would have their main customer office open. It may be appropriate to add some wording or a separate condition that Cuesta Title will continue to maintain a customer service office in a zone where that type of use would be allowed. In relation to medical offices, there could be some kind of condition restricting that type of use here. Amotd Jonas stated it is staff's understanding that the medical facility at this site is a skilled training facility and doesn't include medical treatments of any kind. A condition could be included to state that medical treatments and related operations are not allowed as part of the PD approval. Commr. Cooper asked if a C-S-S-PD would be redundant. Ms. Ricci stated there was a use permit approved with the development of Project A 88- 97. One of the main concems at that time was the size and height of the building and the potential for adding 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of floor space at the mezzanine level. With the original approval, there was a condition that any habitable space added to this building at the mezzanine level would require a use permit. There was also a list of uses that would be allowed. She noted there is a concern with maintaining a consistent zoning pattern along the east side of Broad Street. 3-45 Draft Planning Commission Minutes February 10, 1999 Page 9 Commr. Ready asked if the nature of the proposed findings and conditions would have any effect in eliminating the conditions of the use permit approval originally given to the applicant in December, 1997. Pam Ricci stated previous conditions and findings would not be overridden. There were no further comments/questions and the public comment session was opened. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Hamish Marshall, WestPac Investments, said they didn't have any idea what sort of tenants they were going to get when the development project was being processed. Now with the project nearing completion, preliminary lease commitments have been made and the ground floor is nearly full. He noted that leasing spaces within the building to various tenants was tied to being able to comply with City parking requirements. He felt they have been able to meet all parking requirements —they are actually over parked. He said that during construction they widened Sacramento Street 6 to 8 feet which adds to the supply of available on-street parking. He added that the project offers many amenities such as a bike path, picnic areas, and a transit stop. This project is ideally located; half a block away are C-S zones with PD overlays with office uses, including a title company with escrow related support services. He noted that there will be no medical component to Tri-Counties Regional Center. This building was built to support large office uses that need backup support for their main operations in town. Ann Miller, 3383 Broad Street, distributed a petition from neighboring businesses and residents requesting mitigation for increased traffic, a traffic light at Capitolio at Broad Street, as well as lowering the speed limit to 40 mph. She said she supports the proposed bus stop and expanded bike storage facilities. She requested that the storm drainage system be inspected yearly and maintained. Commr. Jeffrey asked if Ms. Miller reviewed the EIR. Ms. Miller replied no. Joe DeLucia, 139 Longview Lane, noted he didn't receive a response to his recent letter to staff, and felt a letter from Mr. Marshall questioned his motives. He said he is a real estate developer and feels established guidelines should be-followed to allow an even playing field. Financial incentives are phenomenal for a developer to convert a C- S building to an office building because C-S building rents at .50-.60/s.f. and office buildings rent for$1-$1.25/s.f. A PD overlay is a huge financial reward. The PD provision indicates zoning should occur simultaneously with the approval of a specific project, not after a project has been approved. He described the merits of subsequent PD overlays and believes this project doesn't adhere to criteria called out in Section 17.62.040. He felt the negative declaration which was based on trip counts generated 3-46 Draft Planning Commission W Butes February 10, 1999 Page 10 by the commercial service aspect does not adequately reflect the significant impacts of higher trip counts generated by office uses. Cuesta Title is a not an approved use in the C-S zone. He felt the 1986 study showing a shortage of office space is outdated. He surveyed seven commercial brokers and found there is no shortage of office space and requested denial of this project. Commr. Cooper asked if this project came under a more rigorous review with original approval process without the PD. Mr. DeLucia said he didn't feel all impacts were adequately addressed relative to a PD when the original C-S approval was granted. Commr. Cooper asked if office space prices may have an effect of the supply of available office space. Mr. DeLucia stated he's leasing office space as fast as he can build it and noted the demand for first-class office space. Roger Marshall, 3470 Broad Street, questioned staff on the availability of a verbatim transcription of the hearing or receiving copies of taped proceedings because he's run into problems with the accuracy of previous minutes. He's been fighting for parking all the way through this project and has attended all ARC meetings. This building is 75,000 sq. ft. When reviewed by the ARC, there were 52,000 sq. ft. on the first floor and now in the final drawings they're down to 48,000 sq. ft. plus whatever can be accommodated on a mezzanine floor. Available parking will be depleted by the proposed tenants and he assumes the city would not allow any mezzanine area at all. He questioned enforcement of prohibited uses. Tri-Counties transport vans are not accommodated. He felt Cuesta Title will have a large draw. He questions the proposed 6,000 sq. ft. architect's office and potential subleases and related parking impacts. He said he believes this proposal is a prime example of fractured planning. Commr. Loh commented the total square footage will be 48,272 and the total required parking is 139.9 spaces. Mr. Marshall anticipates future mezzanine plans will impact the current required parking. He stated Caltrans is puzzled why they weren't notified of the negative declaration for the final development overlay. Tom Freedman, 1012 Vista Del Collados, owns an industrial building on Sacramento Drive and a commerce park in town. He felt this building was designed to be two stories and has the potential to be a 75,000 sq. ft. office building. He's concerned with future parking impacts and feels mixed-use parking for this project should be discouraged. Traffic problems are also a concem. It's nearly impossible to make a left tum onto Broad Street. He supports future signalization at Capitolio Way. 3-47 Draft Planning Commission Miij,..es February 10, 1999 Page 11 Steve Putts, project architect, stated this building was designed to accommodate approximately 20,000 sq. ft. of mezzanine, but a mezzanine is not being constructed and is not permitted. A mezzanine would require separate permit approval and none of the currently proposed tenants are requesting mezzanine use. He believes a PD overlay for this site is well suited because it's located on a major entry to the city and it has a creek running through it This is a 50,000 sq. ft. building that's arranged for larger tenants. He doesn't believe negative traffic impacts will occur and feels that parking standards have been met Hamish Marshall, addressed profit margin prospects associated with this PD overlay. He has large tenants for support office space that want tenancy in this building. Traffic issues were addressed three times during the previous process. A traffic study was commissioned and they are making off-site improvements to Broad Street to mitigate impacts. Public improvements imposed are extensive and will benefit Broad Street, Sacramento Drive, and the bike path. Broad Street is becoming a gateway to the city and the building is designed to reflect this aspect. They can only fill the building to a point where parking can be supported. There is no mezzanine planned. He requested that the commission recommend approval of the rezoning to the City Council. Mr. Marshall stated improvements also include five street lamps and a transit stop on Broad Street He further noted that creek maintenance is the city's responsibility. Mr. Marshal stated that Tri-Counties requested a transit stop for their disabled clients. He doesn't anticipate parking impacts through this use. Commr. Jeffrey asked if the applicants would entertain eliminating the plans for the mezzanine. Mr. Marshall restated there are no current plans for a mezzanine. Commr. Jeffrey asked if a condition prohibiting a future mezzanine could be included due to intensity of use. Mr. Marshall replied yes. Commr. Jeffrey asked if a condition could be imposed to prohibit any attempts to combine uses or sublease office space Mr. Marshall said he believes occupancy can be monitored through business licenses which are attached to the premises. Leases contain clauses prohibiting subleasing. Pam Ricci stated business tax certificates are issued and reviewed when received. Commr. Loh questioned the height of the building. 3-48 Draft Planning Commission Minutes February 10, 1999 Page 12 Mr. Marshall explained that it was built as a spec building and that the market has changed. Commr. Loh asked if speed bumps will be installed. Mr. Marshall replied yes. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Peterson moved to continue review of the amendment to March 10 after the Commission's commercial zoning workshop with direction to staff to consult with Caltrans regarding possible traffic signalization on Broad St. at Sacramento The motion was seconded by Commissioner Whittlesev . Arnold Jonas stated at the time the use permit for the original project was under consideration, a traffic study-was commissioned by the City which was reviewed by Caltrans and ultimately accepted. This resulted in the conditions of approval for certain improvements that were required to accommodate potential traffic implications of this project. That staff report evaluated a range of uses based on Institute of Traffic Engineers' standards and these uses fell within the range of uses that were evaluated by that traffic study for traffic generation from this site. The Public Works Department felt the study was directly applicable to these uses as well. The study did not recognize the need that this use would generate enough additional traffic to require the immediate imposition of a traffic signal. He also noted this is a State highway and the speed limit is regulated by Caltrans and not the City. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if an impact fee is being assessed. Mr. Jonas stated traffic impact fees will be paid which is separate from the physical improvements required. Commr. Cooper had staff explain the focus and goals of the upcoming Commission workshop. He likes the concept of the motion but is concemed that the workshop will not directly affect this project. Commr. Jeffrey feels that if this PD were denied, the intensity of use could actually increase over and above what is being proposed. Commissioner Loh asked if future construction of a mezzanine could be possible. Pam Ricci stated a request for habitable space at the mezzanine level would have to go through the use permit process. With the current tenant mix they have used all available parking and wouldn't be able to create additional mezzanine space. 349 Draft Planning Commission M,,.,(es February 10, 1999 Page 13 Commr. Ready had concerns about the proposed tenant mux and the overall nature of the application. He said he could support a continuance until after the Commission's workshop, but doesn't feel comfortable with the portion of the motion relative to Caltrans and signalization. Arnold Jonas noted that in order to impose a signal requirement, there would have to be a clear nexus between the traffic generated from this project and the triggering for the need of a signal. The traffic study has shown this project would not trigger the need for signalization in and of itself. Commr. Cooper had concerns with cumulative impacts in this area. Commissioner Peterson amended his motion to delete reference to direct staff to consult with Caltrans regarding the need or lack thereof for a traffic signal on Broad St. at Sacramento. Commissioner Whittlesey accepted the amendment to the motion. AYES: Commrs. Peterson, Whittlesey, Loh, Cooper, and Vice Chair Ready NOES: Commissioner Jeffrey REFRAIN: Chairman Senn The motion carried 5-1. Chairman Senn refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest. The Commission provided comments/concems for the staff and applicant's benefit. Commr. Loh and Vice Chair Ready asked staff to provide more detail associated with the traffic study that was originally prepared at the time the project was approved. Commrs. Loh and Jeffrey expressed concerns about future expansion of the mezzanine. Commr. Jeffrey would like to see a condition included to address the prohibition of combining uses or subletting floor space which would result in intensification of use. Commr. Ready and Commissioner Whittlesey asked for input from the City Attorney regarding potential enforcement issues regarding prohibited uses. Commr. Peterson had concerns with the potential for the need for a traffic signalization and questioned the ability of transit stop users' ability to safely cross the street without a crosswalk. Commr. Ready asked if the Commission should be considering conditions eliminating the prospect of a mixed-use/shared parking reduction. He's concerned about the prospect of drawing a distinction between a title company and title company plant, especially with limiting escrow services at the CS site. 3-50 To: Jerry Kenny, Supervising Civil Engineer From: Jim Hanson,Transportation Assistant CC: Terry Sanville,Principal Transportation Planner Date: 02/25/99 Re: Acacia Creek Project I have reviewed the Traffic Impact report submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo by CCS regarding the Acacia Creek Commercial Building and have considered the impact of the potential additional trips associated with the proposed zoning change.Information from Community Development indicates a maximum professional office space use of approximately 75%of the building,the remaining 25%to be occupied as previously indicated. Applying the averaging method used by CCS in their report to estimate the potential additional trip generation for the project,I calculated that an increase of approximately 10 vph during the peak hours,assuming maximum professional office space use. Even at this maximum use,the CCS report should be valid for this slight increase in traffic during the peak periods.It should be noted that the proposed uses indicate less than the maximum 75%professional office space. Therefore, it is likely that the additional increase in traffic will be less than the calculated 10 vph during the peak periods. 3-51 From: Jerry Kenny To: SLOIPO.PRICCI Date: 3/3/99 12:11pm Subject: Acacia Creek Project -Forwarded The attached memo from J Hanson should hopefully resolve the Planning Commisssion's concerns in this regard. CalTrans concurred with the fact that a traffic signal is not required as a result of this project, but that it may be needed in the future - but not necessarily at this location - due to the proposed new intersection of Prado Rd. extension through the Margarita expansion area (Margarita Specific Plan) to the Orcutt Specific Plan area - and ultimately connecting with Johnson Avenue. The Broad/Prado intesection will probably be the best location for a traffic signal. Plans for the relocated Route 3 transit facility (bus turnout and shelter) , just north of the bridge, have been approved by Caltrans and the City and will be constructed in the near future. This moves the stop from the vacant "Von's/williams Bros. site" to accommodate better service to the existing developments and this project. The route currently operates on 1 hr. intervals, with the potential for half-hr. intervals with expected system changes. CC: MBERTACC, JHanson, BFarley 3-52 From: James Hanson To: JICENNY Date: 3/3/99 10:27am Subject: Acacia Creek Project Jerry - Per our most recent review of the traffic impact study for the Acacia Creek Project, it is estimated that the number of additional trips that will be generated is insignificant. Therefore the original findings of the traffic impact study are still valid: - A signal is not recommended for installation at the intersection of Capitolio and Broad at this time. - If some form of traffic control device is called for at the intersection of Capitolio and Broad at some point in the future to mitigate traffic impact at this location, the Acacia Creek project will have paid its pro rata share of the costs through their TIF contribution. CC: TSANVILL 3-53 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM a 2 BY: Pam Ricci,Associate Planner-Pfd MEETING DATE: February 10, 1999 FROM: Ron Whisenand,Development Review Manago� FILE NUMBER: ER/PD 201-98 PROJECT ADDRESS: 3450 Broad Street SUBJECT: Request to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service- Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings, for property located on the east side of Broad Street,north of Capitolio Way. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council,based on findings, and with conditions. BACKGROUND Situation The new Acacia Creek Commercial building is nearing completion of construction. The project proposes to add the Planned Development(PD) overlay zoning to the site to enable large office tenants. City Council adopted amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Regulations in March 1987 that allowed some large offices in the C-S and M zones with the approval of a planned development rezoning. The enabling ordinance was adopted because the existing office zones did not provide adequate room to accommodate the number of large (over 2,500 square feet) offices expected to need space within the City (Office Supply and Demand Study, Quad Engineering, 1986). The proposed PD overlay zoning is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 33.2 E,which states that large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having limited need for client visits or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and Manufacturing districts,subject to approval of a Planned Development(PD)zoning application. The Planning Commission reviews zoning amendments and makes a recommendation to the City Council,which takes a final action on such requests. Data Summary Applicant: Acacia Creek LLC,A Limited Liability . ATTACHMENT 7 3-54 PD 201-98 Page 2 Representative: WestPac Investments, Imc. Existing Zoning: C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning Proposed Zoning: C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings General Plan Land Use Designation: Services&Manufacturing Environmental Status: A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures was recommended by the Development Review Manager on January 12, 1999. Final action on the initial study will be taken by the City Council. Project Action Deadline: Legislative actions not subject to processing deadlines. Site Description The site contains 3.7 acres and is currently in the process of being developed with a new, approximately 48,000 square-foot, commercial building, parking areas, bicycle path and landscaping. The property has frontage on both Broad Street and Sacramento Drive. Acacia Creek crosses the site in the northwestern comer. Significant vegetation includes a number of trees near the creek. The project site is currently zoned C-S-S, Service Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, as are the properties to the direct north. Properties to the east and south are either zoned M, Manufacturing, or M-S, Manufacturing with the Special Consideration overlay zoning. The sites to the west across Broad Street are undeveloped and located outside the City limits. There are residential properties to the further northwest. EVALUATION 1. Rezoning Request& Consistency with the City's General Plan The site is designated for"Services and Manufacturing" on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map. The LUE encourages a wide range of uses, including "business services, wholesaling, building contractors, utility company yards, auto repair, printing, food manufacturing and other light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants)." The LUE also mentions "convenience restaurants and other activities primarily serving area workers" as appropriate types of uses. LUE Section 3.5 contains the policies for the Services and Manufacturing category. Policy 3.5.2 F.,Appropriate Uses,allows for large offices",with the proper approvals. This policy is also reiterated in the Offices Section, specifically Policy 3.3.2 E. Therefore, the application for a Planned Development,PD, zoning to allow certain large offices is consistent with these LUE policies. The project site is currently zoned C-S-S, Service Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning. The "S" overlay requires the processing of an administrative use permit with development to insure that the particular special considerations associated with thisssite_ PD 201-98 Page 3 addressed. The special considerations with this site include: its location along Highway 227 and concerns for area-wide circulation impacts; the need for various frontage improvements with development; and the location of a portion of the riparian corridor of Acacia Creek within the site. The required use permit was approved on December 5, 1997, and processed concurrently with architectural plans for the shell building. The use permit was conditioned to limit the range of uses allowed at the site that might raise either compatibility or parking issues. To address potential parking concerns, the creation of any habitable space at the mezzanine level required the processing of an administrative use permit. The applicant has now applied for the Planned Development overlay zoning at the site to enable the establishment of large offices (defined as having a minimum floor area of 2,500 square feet). Zoning regulations implement LUE policy through Note 10 following Table 9 - Uses Allowed by Zone which provides for establishing large offices in the C-S and M zones, subject to PD zoning approval. Office uses typically characterized by substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services, such as banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,medical and legal offices,are prohibited. Findings which the Planning Commission and City Council must make in approving a PD zoning for large offices are outlined in zoning regulations Section 17.62.040 C. The Commission and Council must also find that uses allowed as part of a PD rezoning are consistent with the General Plan(Section 17.50.020). 2. Specific Tenants Proposed The applicant has submitted a "Proposed Tenant List" which describes the types of businesses and their employment characteristics. This list was requested by staff in order to evaluate whether or not tenants qualified as the types of large offices that could be located in the Services & Manufacturing land use category. The proposed building with development of ground floor leases (no mezzanines) will total 48,272 square feet. Table A, "Proposed Tenants", contains the names, floor areas occupied, number of employees and whether the use needs to be a component of the large office PD. TABLE A PROPOSED TENANTS Name Floor Areas #Employees PD Needed for Use? Pacific Industrial Electric (PIE) 10,000 sq.ft. 5 full-time;2 part-time No Cuesta Title 6,788 sq.ft- 23-25 Yes Tri-County Regional Center 7,111 sq.ft. 26 Yes County Drug&Alcohol 9,972 sq.ft. 25 Yes 9F-GC Architects 5,874 sq.ft. 20 No Uncommitted Space 8,527 sq.ft. TOTAL 48,272 sq.ft. 3-56 PD 201-98 Page 4 As noted in Table A, Pacific Industrial Electric, P.I.E., which sells electrical supplies to contractors and BFGC Architects are allowed uses in the C-S zone, and through Use Permit A 88-97, that do not require approval through the proposed PD to locate at the site. However, Cuesta Title, Tri-County Regional Center and County of San Luis Obispo Drag Rehabilitation would be subject to the restrictions imposed through the large office PD zoning, and a finding that they are consistent with general plan policies. 3. The Tri-Polar Concent Since the early 1980s, the City's Land Use Element (LUE) has contained policies which encourage governmental offices to be congregated in certain physical areas of the City. The term "tri-polar" evolved because the locations for government offices were to be located at three different geographic areas or "poles". The three poles are Johnson Avenue near General Hospital, the downtown civic center and the South Higuera area near Prado Road. Current policies related to these poles are now contained in the LUE Section 5.1, Public Facilities, and identified in Figure 5. LUE Policy 5.1.6 discusses the Social Services area and the desire for certain specified governmental offices to be located here (County Social Services, California Employment Development and Rehabilitation, Federal Social Security Administration). LUE Policy 5.1.7, Related Offices, suggests that functionally related offices to those named above, should be located in this area as well. One of the proposed uses at this site is the offices of the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program. LUE policies seem to encourage, but not mandate that related social services programs be located in the South Higuera area LUE Policy 5.1.10 says: 5.1.10 Other Governnsent Functions Some government functions which have been provided at certain locations in the City should be located close to related activities. though they should not be bound to any one of the identified centers Such functions include: A Probation - suitable for the civic center (courts), the County operational center on Highway 1 (sherif), or the social services area, B. Alcohol and drug treatment p_rogEams - suitable for the social- services area or the health-care area. From staffs perspective,this County program should be located in either the social services area on South Higuera Street,or the health care area on Johnson Avenue,and is not an appropriate use at this outlying commercial site that is completely detached from other governmental services. 4. Cuesta Title &Tri-County Rgeonal Center The Cuesta Title Plant would provide back-up support services for its main customers s PD 201-98 Page 5 office located downtown at 1011 Pacific Street They will be doing the background record searches and preparing the title documents, but not meeting with customers. Given the fact that their downtown location will continue to be open,there will be virtually no need for customers to visit the site. Therefore,the proposed use is consistent with the criteria for large office PDs with limited public visitation and a need for a larger facility. Tri-County Regional Center is a non-profit organization that provides training programs for disabled adults. While they provide contract work for governmental agencies, they are not a governmental agency necessarily tied to locating in the social services area The project, which will be developing a transit stop, works well for the program which relies on public transit for some of its patrons. Staff finds that the use is an appropriate one at the project site, and is not a type of office use prohibited by general plan policies to be located in a C-S zone. 5. Parldnn With the review of project development plans through the architectural review and use permit processes, parking was an often discussed and debated topic in regard to the proposed "spec" building without known tenants. In fact, an appeal of the ARC'S approval of the project was filed by the adjacent neighbor to the south largely because of parking issues. The use permit carefully looked at parking. Conditions of approval included both limitations on the types of allowed and conditionally allowed on-site uses, and restrictions on creating new mezzanine spaces,to directly address potential parking concerns. In the C-S zone,there are a range of different allowed uses with divergent parking requirements. Some office and retail uses have a requirement of 1:300 and some warehousing uses have a requirement of 1:1,500. Shell buildings are often developed with a parking ratio in between such as 1:500. The site was developed with a total of 143 parldng spaces. With a total floor area of 48,272 square feet,the project has a parking ratio of one space for each 338 square feet of floor area. With the review of project development plans,the applicant's proposed amount of parking appeared more then adequate for typical C-S development However, it was noted that if a majority of the lease space in the building was allocated to offices that parking may become an issue. The applicant submitted a letter dated 1-12-99 that outlines the parking requirements of proposed uses. .The total project parking requirement is 140 spaces. Since the applicant's letter was prepared, there have been some minor changes made to the site plan which have resulted in a net increase in the total number of parking spaces from 139 to 143. Therefore, parking as proposed, even with the unallocated space figured at 1:300, and no shared or mixed use parking reductions, exceeds City requirements by 3 spaces. To insure that parking continues to comply with City standards, Condition No. 1 is recommended which limits the amount of floor space allocated to professional office uses to a maximum of 39,000 gross square feet 3-58 PD 201-98 Page 6 ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed amendment, based on inconsistency with the general plan. Planning Commission action is final unless appealed to the City Council. 2. Continue review of the amendment with specific direction to the applicant and staff. OTHIIt DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Other departments were consulted regarding the land use change. Specific requirements from other departments have been incorporated as conditions of planned development approval. RECOMMENDATION Review the initial study of environmental impact, and recommend approval of the amendment to amend the City's zoning map designation from C-S-S, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning,to C-S-S-PD, Service-Commercial with the Special Consideration and Planned Development overlay zonings to the City Council, based on findings, and with conditions. Findings 1. The project will be compatible with existing and allowed land uses in the area. 2. The project's location or access arrangements do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential zones. 3. The project, which is a PD rezoning to allow some large offices at the site, will not affect potential impacts related to noise,light and glare,and loss of privacy,among others,imposed by commercial activities on nearby residential areas. 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. 6. The project is consistent with the General Plan, including policies on government office locations, with the recommended condition that .the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program should be located in either the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue, and is not an appropriate use at this outlying commercial site that is completely detached from other governmental servil_59 PD 201-98 Page 7 7. A Negative Declaration was prepared by the Community Development Department on January 12, 1999, which describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment subject to the mitigation measures shown in the attached initial study ER 201-98 being incorporated into the project. Conditions 1. A maximum of 39,000 gross square feet of floor space in the existing buildings on the site may be occupied by professional office uses. 2. Except as otherwise noted in these conditions of approval, all requirements included in the zoning regulations for the C-S zone shall apply. The list of uses approved through Use Permit A 88-97 shall continue to apply, with the amendments imposed through this PD approval allowing large offices with some restrictions. 3. More than one office tenant may occupy office space on the site, but no single professional office tenant may occupy less than 2500 square feet of adj scent,interconnected floor area. 4. The following types of office-related uses are prohibited: banks, real estate offices, financial institutions,medical clinics,doctors offices,and lawyers offices. 5. The proposed use of the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation program is not allowed because it has been determined to be a type of government office use with a close fimctional relationship to the social services area on South Higuera Street, or the health care area on Johnson Avenue. However, other government agencies not functionally related to general government,social services,or health care operations,as specified in the General Plan Land Use Element Section 5.1 may be allowed at the site through the approval of an administrative use permit where it can be demonstrated that there is limited need for public visitation. The Hearing Office may refer these requests to the Planning Commission if the request raises potentially significant General Plan consistency issues. 6. The proposed PD allowing professional offices in the C-S zone will require additional traffic impact fees to be paid prior to issuance of building permits for the tenant improvements. A credit shall be given for those traffic impact fees already paid with the shell building permit (based on a C-S zone commercial/warehouse). 7. Bicycle Parking: The applicant shall provide additional short- and long-tens parking for bicycles as follows: • Relocate the rack shown adjacent to the BFGC Architects tenant space to be in front of the unallocated tenant space, and install an additional rack (for two bicycles) near the main entrance to the BFGC space(possibly to the right of the entry). 3-60 PD 201-98 Page 8 • Install an additional rack (for four bicycles) on the north side of the building near the main entry to the County of SLO Drug Rehab tenant space • On all plans submitted for tenant improvements for each of the proposed tenant spaces, clearly identify the lockable rooms that will be reserved for employee bicycle storage consistent with standards of the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan. 8. Transit Stop: The applicant has requested relocation of the existing transit stop at Capitolio Way and Broad Street to accommodate the proposed County Regional Center. This is agreeable to staff, contingent upon approval of the design by the City's Transit Manager and approval of any requisite encroachment permit by Caltrans. If pursued by the applicant, the facility shall include a transit turnout, shelter, lighting and a trash receptacle along the property's Broad Street frontage,north of Acacia Creek. Attached: Vicinitymap Reuced copy of project site plan Floor plan with proposed uses Letter from representative dated 1-12-99with parking calcs and tenant descriptions Use Permit A 88-97 approval letter dated 12-9-97 Excerpts from the zoning regulations&LUE Letter from Joseph DeLucia dated 1-19-99 outlining concerns with the project Response to DeLucia letter dated 1-20-99 from Hamish Marshall Letter from Steve Pults dated 1-21-99 Initial Study ER 201-98 3-61 1 r 0,9=0M . ® •• :111±11~ ` / �+h f 4 4 flfilr��l�f�� I�11I�Iftt _.II1 fI1 111 III III �/ III IIII•111111 III 111 S� � �. ��j 111j11;t 11�111i 11I�11� 0�. . -� '1.1111111111IIf1.1111II111` 'y m Ijf11jt11j�11j11a i 1/ If • • 1 • 1 11 fI II 111 III 111 11/jf�lfj&III 1ofILII 1111•III 111I111 11.1111a 111 1II 111 ` Ott 1I�t llfj f+�1i1as . mm ll z 1jj: - 1•,::11 f:II==1::I11•I�:If:*lI VICINITY MA.P"ml ARC � \ rjta�=f l�ti�t�ilf=f lt�fil1 � off II;1I�If�f1 j1fi� � 88-97 3450 BROAD � �t r4 _ a 1 I aimUp � /�'•� On+ 3 v fto I 11r, PHfit all 2 ZIP * . - By _ M; i 7 YI' •� (q 1. ., Oil 5 ` 1 r �a\Ns, CL !a � a rd l Tom•—r�-.... . ' •'t i FF : � W i i a s Q • i 3-63 w L� i Old .� o� w yU c64 as .o 0o d N p O E~ � in w iina t _ o Q o� 0 L a. i., c cr In , 0000 r.+ •~ V 3-64 WestPac RECEIVED January 12, 1999 JAN 13 1999 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISpO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Pam Ricci Associate Planner City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: PD Overlay for Acacia Creek, 3450 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA Dear Pam: In anticipation of the hearing on the 10th of February 1999, I thought it appropriate to forward to you our parking ratios in relation to the tenants that we are proposing at Acacia Creek. We have used City standards for office space parking and believe that we have no problems meeting the parking requirements of the City on-site. The parking ratios are as follows: Tenants Square Footage Required Parking Provided Parking P. L E. 1,028 sf/300 12.40 12.00 8,972 sf/1 000 Cuesta Title 6,788 sk7300 22.63 23.00 WegFac Hawaii.L[. Tri-Co-Center 7,8W s17300 23.70 24.00 we s c„ �faBa10mq G Drug &Alcohol 9,972 s17300 33.24 33.00 BFGC 5,874 sf/300 19.58 20.00 Spare 8,527s6300 28.42 28.00 Total 48,272 sf 139.97 140.00 w4sftc i»yestmellt%Me. 1880 Santa But=Sheet,Sone F San WsObispo,CA03401 805 644-7543•Fn-SM44-ll77 3-65 Page 2 January 12, 1999 PD Overlay The City has also made it a requirement that we widen Sacramento Street. By doing this we have been able to create additional off-street parking. However, this additional parking has not been considered in our calculations as we have been able to meet the City's parking requirements on site. Also,please find attached an exhibit that outlines where each tenant is proposed to go. If you have any questions regarding the above information, please call me. Yours sincerely, Hamish Marshall Vice President Development Enc 3-66 Proposed Tenant List Acacia Creek Commercial Tri County Regional Center(ICRC) is the proposed tenant for the northwest comer of Acacia Creek. The square footage of this comer spot is around 7.111. Tri County Regional Center is involved in working as a private contractor to various state, city and county governments regarding developmentally disabled persons. As such their role involves the usual amount of office work required in dealing with government entities. This includes but not limited to filling out reports, claims, etc. Beyond this they work with their clients and schedule appointments, counsel, educate and provide a variety of other services for those individuals with mental and physical handicaps. They anticipate employing around 26 individuals by June of 1999; however, it is quite likely that these people will not be on site at the same time as some of the work done involves outreach services. It is possible that they will utilize a large portion of the space as a meeting room in which to inform and educate the public on their services. Tri County Regional Center is a non- profit entity that is privately funded and relies heavily on outside donations. Although TCRC does a lot of work for State, County and City agencies it is not a government agency it is a non profit organization that does work on behalf of some government agencies. The north central section of Acacia Creek is to be occupied by Pacific Industrial Electric. Their function is to provide wholesale electrical supplies to contractors. The space they will be leasing is 10.000 square feet and will have five full time employees and perhaps 2 part time employees. Much of their work is stocking and selling. Sales individuals are often out on site with bids and proposals. PIE is an allowable Tenant in the CS zone The site on the northeast fronting Sacramento Street is possibly leased by the County of San Luis Obispo Drug Rehabilitation. They are chiefly an educational and service oriented business. Much of the time will be involved in counseling clients, treatment of drug related problems, education and doing office work involved in dealing with government policies. They also will have community meetings and will have a meeting room but mainly office space which is sometimes shared. Their members also work in the field and travel. They plan to have +/- 25 employees. They have looked at 9.972 square feet. 3-67 The most easterly site located directly on Sacramento site is proposed for use by BFGC Architects. They have looked at 5,874 square feet and will use this as office space to design and draft construction plans. They will also desire a conference or meeting room and plan on having 20 employees. BFGC is an allowable tenant in the CS zone. Cuesta Title Plant is looking at the most southerly spot facing Broad Street or Highway 227. They have 6,788 square feet and will use this as office space to employee 23 to 25 individuals. They are mainly involved in dealing with the legalities of property. They will be offering escrow and title services. However, Cuesta Title will be keeping their customer office on Pacific Street, therefore keeping Cuesta Titles regular activity at the Pacific Street site and not at the Acacia Creek site. 3-68 city of sAn tuts oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 December 9, 1997 Acacia Creek, LLC Hamish Marshall 555 Ramona Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: Use PerrnitAppl.A 88-97 3450 Broad Street Dear Mr. Marshall: On Friday, December 5, 1997, 1 conducted a public hearing on your request to allow a commercial development in the Special Considerations zone, at the above location. . After reviewing the information presented, I approved your request, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons firing or working at the site or in the vicinity. 2. The proposed project, as conditioned by this use permit, and with development in accordance with plans approved by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) on 11-17-97 (ARC 88-97), is appropriate at this location and will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. The proposed use conforms with the general plan and meets zoning ordinance requirements with restrictions on the range of allowed and conditionally allowed uses permitted at the site in accordance with the Special Considerations °S" overlay zoning of the site. The special considerations with this site include: its location along Highway 227 and concerns for area-wide circulation impacts; the need for various frontage improvements with development; and the location of a portion of the riparian corridor of Acacia Creek within the site. 4. Approval of the project design by the ARC included approval of a creek setback exception to allow portions of a planned Class I bicycle path through the site to encroach into portions of the required creek setback, finding that its development would not adversely impact resources of the riparian corridor and was consistent with adopted City plans. 3-69 ® The QtY at San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities Teleeommurdeffiions Devioe for the Deaf(805)781-7410. A 88-97 Page 2 5. The special considerations of the site related to the need for circulation issues and frontage improvements have been adequately addressed by adopted mitigation measures and conditions of ARC approval. 6. A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures was prepared by the Community Development Department on October 28, 1997, which describes significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Negative Declaration concludes that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment subject to the following mitigation measures being incorporated into the project: a. 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. 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. b. Oil and sand separators or other filtering media shall be installed at each drain inlet intercepting runoff as a means of filtering toxic substances from run off before it enters the creek directly or through the storm water system. The separator must be regularly maintained to ensure efficient pollutant removal. c. The applicant shall submit hydraulic calculations indicating the added storm water run-off anticipated by proposed development and any needed drainage improvements to mitigate any rise in the 100-year storm water surface elevation. Improvements to mitigate impacts may include, but are not limited to, detention facilities. d. The project shall include: • bicycle parking and shower and locker facilities for employee use; • continued sidewalk along the property; • 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; and • provision of a bus stop and shelter on Broad Street, if feasible and supported by the City. e. The applicant shall install speed humps designed to effectively limit speeds to 7.5 mph on the southern parking aisle between Sacramento Drive and Broad Street. 3-70 A 88-97 Page 3 f. The basis for determining projected traffic levels was an average of the City's allowable and conditionally allowable uses in the C-S zone utilizing Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) traffic generation rates. The required use permit for the project should look at the range of allowable uses at this project with traffic generation impacts as a consideration, not to exceed the ITE traffic generation rates studied. g. The applicant shall install a short stretch of pavement for a deceleration lane within Caltrans right-of-way at the Broad Street (State Route 227) driveway with a radius type drive approach. k To mitigate potential safety hazards along Broad Street (State Route 227) caused by cars being slowed or stopped by left tum queues extending out into adjacent through lanes, the applicant shall extend the southbound left tum pocket on Broad Street at Capitolio Way by 80 feet. The pocket extension would require the reconstruction of the existing raised median. The medianlleft tum pocket reconfiguration shall meet applicable City and Caltrans standards. i. The applicant shall submit a landscaping/creek restoration plan along with plans submitted for final review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission. The plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the botanical survey prepared by V.L. Holland, Ph.D. dated May 1997, as modified by the 11-12-97 memorandum from the Natural Resources Manager, and incorporated into this study by reference. Along with working drawings submitted for a building permit, a more detailed creek restoration plan, including creek bank stabilization proposals, shall be routed to the City Engineer, the City's Natural Resource Manager and the Community Development Director for review and comment. This plan will also require the review and approval of other agencies with regulatory control over work done in the riparian corridor of Acacia Creek, specifically the State Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The plan shall contain a specific schedule for long-term monitoring of plantings. j. The bicycle path shall either be located entirely outside of the creek setback area or an exception requested to allow portions of the path within the required creek setback. The project landscaping creek/restoration plan shall include proposals for enhanced planting of the northern side of Acacia Creek. k. 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. 3-71 A 88-97 Page 4 L The applicant shall complete a Phase II environmental site assessment to confirm that any contamination issues have been adequately addressed prior to site development. Accurate delineation of site contamination and resolution of all contamination issues prior to construction must be accomplished to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. m. The new building shall incorporate facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. n. If significant archaeological materials are discovered during grading and construction, all construction activities that may damage those materials shall immediately cease. The project sponsor shall then propose specific mitigation based on a qualified archaeologist's recommendations. The Director shall approve, approve with changes, or reject the mitigation proposal (if found incomplete, infeasible, or unlikely to reduce adverse impacts to an acceptable level). If the proposal is approved, the project sponsor shall implement mitigation, to the satisfaction of the Director. A copy of the archaeologist's recommendations and the Director's decision will be forwarded to the Cultural Heritage Committee. Conditions 1. An administrative use permit will be required for any uses proposing habitable floor space at the mezzanine level. Use permits for development of mezzanine areas as habitable floor space will only be approved with the assurance that adequate parking exists to serve the new square footage. Use of the mezzanine level for storage may be allowed subject to meeting parking requirements. 2. The following is a list of allowed and conditionally allowed uses at the site: Allowed Uses: • Advertising & related services (graphic design, writing, mailing, addressing, etc.) • Auto repair & related services (body, brake, transmissions, muffler shops; painting,etc.) • Auto sound system installation • Broadcast studios • Building and landscape maintenance services • Caretaker's quarters • Catering services • Computer services • Construction activities • Contractors-all types of general and special building contractor's offices 3-72 A 88-97 Page 5 • Contractors yards • Credit reporting and collection • Delivery and private postal services • Detective and security services • Equipment rental • Exterminators and fumigators • Feed stores and farm supply sales • Government agency corporation yards • Laboratories(medical,analytical research) • Laundry/drycleaners -cleaning plant -pick-up point • Offices(engineering)engineers,architects,and industrial design • Photocopy services -quick printers • Photofinishing- retail • Photofinishing-wholesale,and blueprinting and microfilming services • Photographic studios • Post offices and public and private postal services • Printing and publishing • Repair services -small household appliances,locksmith,seamstress,shoe repair -large appliance,electrical equipment power tools,saw sharpening • Research&development-services,software,consumer products, instruments,office equipment and similar items,and related light chemical processing • Retail sales - appliances, furniture and furnishings, musical instruments, processing equipment, business, office and medical equipment stores, catalog stores,sporting goods, outdoor supply. • Retail sales - -auto parts and accessories except tires and batteries as principal use • Retail sales-tires and batteries • Retail sales and repair of bicycles • Utility Companies -Corporation yards • Vending machines(See Section 17.08.050) • Warehousing,mini-storage,moving companies • Water treatment services • Wholesale and mail order houses Uses Allowed by Director's Aaaroval of an Administrative Use Permit*: • Athletic and health clubs,fitness centers,game courts • Antennas(commercial broadcasting) • Banks and savings and loans(branch office only- no headquarters) 3-73 A 88-97 Page 6 • Barbers, hairstylists,manicurists,tanning centers • Bowling alleys • Cabinet and carpentry shops • Day care-day care center • Gas distributors-containerized(butane, propane,oxygen,acetylene,etc.) • Laundry/drycleaners -self-service • Manufacturing-food, beverages;ice; apparel;electronic,optical,instrumentation products; jewelry;musical instruments-,sporting goods;art materials • Organizations(professional,religious,political,labor,fraternal,trade,youth,etc.) offices and meeting rooms • Restaurants,sandwich shops,take-out food,etc.with a maximum of 2,000 square feet of floor area • Retail sales - indoor sales of building materials and gardening supplies (floor and wall coverings,paint,glass stores,etc.) • Schools -business,trade, recreational,or other specialized schools • Secretarial& related services(court reporting,stenography,typing,telephone answering, etc.) • Tattoo Parlors • Temporary sales • Temporary uses-not otherwise listed • Ticket/travel agencies • Utility companies -engineering& administration offices • Veterinarians Future applications for use permits shall be subject to the rules and regulations in effect at the time of application. My decision is final unless appealed to the Planning Commission within ten days of the action. An appeal may be filed by any person aggrieved by the decision. If you have any questions,please call Pam Ricci at 781-7168. Sincerely, cc: Steve Pults,AIA 1401 Higuera Street SLO, CA 93401 Ro aid Whise nd Heirs of Helen Jones Hearing Officer 713 Rancho Drive SLO, CA 93401 3-74 E. Off-street loading requirements: Section 17.62.040B.) Gross Floor Area Number of Spaces B. Under an approved development plan, lot sae and of guHfng Required configuration, yards, height, coverage and parking may be specified for the project without conformance 1,000 to 9,999 none to the standards of the underlying zone. 10,000 to 29,999 1 30,000 to 99,999 2 C. For procedures and performance criteria, see 100,000 and more 3 Chapter 17.62.1Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9203.14(C)) (See also Performance Standards, Chapter 17.18.) (Ord. 1085 - 1 Ex. A(pard, 1987; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9203.13(81) Chapter 17.50 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT(PD) ZONE Sections: 17.50.010 Purpose and application. 17.50.020 Allowed uses. 17.50.030 Property development standards. 17.50.010 Purpose and application. The planned development zone is intended to encourage imaginative development and effective use of sites. It does this by allowing more variation in project design than normal standards would allow. Such variation from normal standards should provide benefits to the project occupants or to the community as a whole which could not be provided under conventional regulations. PD rezoning must occur simultaneously with approval of a specific project. In the C-C zone, the PD zone may be applied to any parcel. In all other zones, the PD zone may be applied to any parcel or contiguous parcels of at least one acre. .(Ord. 1129 - 1 (pard, 1988; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9203.141A)) 17.50.020 Allowed uses. Any use or combination of uses which conform with the general plan may be established in the PD zone. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9203.140) 17.50.030 Property development standards. A. Residential densities may exceed those allowed in the underlying zone by not more than 25%. (In order to approve a development which exceeds the density otherwise allowed, the Planning Commission and Council must make certain findings as required by 3-75 71 plan, the Council shall approve the rezoning and the clinics and doctors' offices and lawyers' offices. official zone map shall be amended to indicate approval of the planned development. (Ord. 941 - 1 1. The project will be compatible with existinr (part), 1982: prior code 9204.4(CI) and allowed land uses in the area. 2. The project's location or access arrangement 17.62.040 Required findings. do not significantly direct traffic to use local or collector streets in residential zones. A. To approve a planned development, the Planning 3. The project will provide adequate mitigation Commission and Council must find that it meets one to address potential impacts related to noise, fight or more of the following criteria: and glare, and loss of privacy, among others, imposed by commercial activities on nearby 1. It provides facilities or amenities suited to a residential areas, by using methods such as setbacks, particular occupancy group (such as the elderly or landscaping, berming and fencing. families with children) which would not be feasible 4.. The project does not preclude industrial or under conventional zoning; service-commercial uses in area especially suited for 2. It transfers allowable development, within a such uses when compared with offices. site, from areas of greater environmental sensitivity or 5. The project does not create a shortage of C-S hazard to areas of less sensitivity or hazard; and M zoned land available for service-commercial or 3. It provides more affordable housing than industrial development. (Ord. 1129 - 1 (part), 1988: would be possible with conventional development; Ord. 1087 - 1 Ex. A(2), 1987; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 4. Features of the particular design achieve the 1982: prior code- 9204.4(D)) intent of conventional standards (privacy, usable open space, adequate parking, compatibility with 17.62.050 Requirement for development plan. neighborhood character, and so on) as well as or better than the standards themselves; No land division may be undertaken and no 5. It incorporates features which result in construction begun within an area zoned PD until a consumption of less materials, energy or water than final development plan has been approved. (Ord. 941 conventional development; - 1 (part), 1982: prior code 9204.4(E)) 6. The proposed project provides exceptional public benefits such as parking, open space, 17.62.060 Final development plan. landscaping, public art, and other special amenities which would not be feasible under conventional A. Within six months of approval of conditional development standards. approval of the development plan, the applicant shall file with the Community Development Department a B. In order to grant a 'density bonus' las explained final development plan. At his discretion and for in Section 17.50.030), the Commission and Council good cause, the Director may extend for six months must find that the proposed development satisfies at the period for filing. least three of the five criteria set out in subsection A of this section. The applicant shall provide a detailed B. The final development plan shall include those statement indicating how the development satisfies items from Section 17.62.010 (Preliminary the appropriate criteria set out in subsection A of this development plan) which describe the proposal, section. The maximum density bonus is not including division of land, type and location of all automatic. In determining the allowable bonus, the buildings and improvements, and so on, but it need Commission and Council shag assess the extent to not include information on existing conditions. which these criteria are met. C. The Director shall review and take action on the C. To approve a planned development allowing large final development plan within 30 days of filing. He professional office buildings which can include shall approve it upon finding that it is in substantial multiple tenants but with no single tenant space less compliance with the preliminary development plan as than 2,500 square feet in the C-S or M zones, the approved or modified by the Council. Upon approval Planning Commission or Council must find that it of the final development plan, the Director shall add meets each of the criteria listed below. The following the number of the planned development to the official types of office-related uses are prohibited in planned zone map (for example, PD 19999)1. Subsequently, developments approved for C-S and M zones: Banks, all grading, construction and landscaping shall comply real estate offices, financial institutions, medical with the approved final development plan. • 81 3-76 1 SIA General Plan Land Use Element F. Provide indoor or outdoor space for public use, designed to provide a focus for some neighborhood activities. 3.23 Expanding Centers The City should evaluate the need for and desirability of additions to existing neighborhood commercial centers only when specific development proposals are made, and not in response to rezoning requests which do not incorporate a development plan. 3.2.4 Stores in Residential Areas Small, individual stores within established residential areas may be retained when they are compatible with surrounding uses. Other isolated commercial uses which are not compatible with residential surroundings eventually should be replaced with compatible uses. . 4 3.25 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 2.0. 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 projects realized building intensity, to reflect existing or desired architectural character in a neighborhood. When dwellings are provided in Neighborhood Commercial districts, they shall not exceed 12 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. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) 3.3 Offices 3.3A Purpose and Included Uses The City should have sufficient land for Office development to meet the demands of City residents and the specialized needs of County residents. Office development includes professional and financial services (such as doctors, architects, and insurance companies and banks) and government agencies. The City should retain the regional offices of state and federal agencies. Not all types of offices are appropriate in all locations. (See office location policies below. Also see the Public Facilities section, pageSq.) 3.3.2 Office Locations A. All types of offices are appropriate in the downtown General Retail district, but are discouraged at street level in storefronts of the commercial core. B. All types of office activities are appropriate in the Office district which surrounds the downtown commercial area, though offices needing very large buildings or generating substantial traffic may not be appropriate in the area which provides a transition to residential neighborhoods. 41 3-77 Land Use Element SLO Genual Plan C. Medical services should be near the hospitals. D. Government social services and the regional offices of state and federal agencies should be near the intersections of South Higuera Street, Prado Road, and Highway 101 (Figure 5); E. Large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having no substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development zoning application. F. Certain business and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to downtown go0emment services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, veterinarians, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. 3.3.3 Offices Outside Designated Areas Existing office buildings outside the areas described in policy 3.3.2 may continue to be used and may have minor expansions if they. A Have access directly from collector or arterial streets, not local residential streets; B. Will not significantly increase traffic in residential areas; C. Will not have significant adverse impacts on nearby uses. 3.3.4 Building Conservation Historic or architecturally significant buildings located in Office districts should be conserved, not replaced. 3.3.5 Building Intensity The ratio of building floor area to site area shall not exceed 1.5. 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 Office districts, they shall not exceed 12 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. (See the residential section for policies on density bonuses for affordable housing.) 42 3-78 Land Use Element SL ) General Plan 3.5 Services and Manufacturing 3.5.1 Purpose The City should have sufficient land designated for Services and Manufacturing to meet most demands of the City, and some demands of the region, for activities such as business services, wholesaling, building contractors, utility company yards, auto repair, printing, food manufacturing and other light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants). Areas reserved for these uses may also accommodate convenience restaurants and other activities primarily serving area workers. 3.5.2 Appropriate Uses The following types of uses are appropriate in areas designated Services and Manufacturing. Certain areas designated Services and Manufacturing may be reserved through special zoning provisions for certain types of uses, to assure compatibility among the wide range of potential uses, and to assure adequate land for-certain types of uses. A. Wholesaling, warehousing, and storage; B. Vehicle sales and rental; C. Retail sales of products which require outdoor areas or large floor areas for display and storage, such as warehouse stores, lumber and building materials dealers, home improvement centers, furniture and appliances stores, and plant nurseries; D. Repair shops, printing services, laundries, animal hospitals, sporting goods stores, auto parts stores, and some recreation facilities; E. Light manufacturing, research and development, and laboratories. (See also "Business Parks" in the Airport section, page 74.) F. Large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having no substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development zoning application. G. Certain businesses and professional services having no substantial public visitation or limited need for access to downtown government services may be in Services and Manufacturing districts. Examples of such uses are computer services, utilities engineering and administration, architects and engineers, industrial design, advertising, building contractors, labor and fraternal organizations, veterinarians, and insurance and financial services that do not directly serve retail customers. 44 3-79 SLO General Plan Land Use Element PUBLIC & CULTURAL FACILITIES Introduction As the County seat and a cultural center for the region,. San Luis Obispo plans to accommodate several types of facilities to support government and cultural services. This section describes preferred locations for various types of facilities. POLICIES t 5.1 Public Facilities 5.1.1 Grouping for Convenience Government offices that provide similar types of services should be grouped for efficient service delivery. 5.1.2 Private Businesses Within any area shown as a preferred location for public facilities, there may be compatible private businesses, so long as they do not displace the preferred public agencies. 5.1.3 Joint Projects Government agencies should cooperatively plan for new or expanded facilities. They should consider joint projects when mutual objectives can be met 5.1.4 Civic Center There should be a downtown civic center (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the civic center, along with compatible businesses: A. City Council offices and meeting rooms, clerk, administration, finance, attorney, personnel, community development, utilities, and public works administration and engineering. Any additional space for these functions should be in or close to City Hall. B. County supervisors offices and meeting rooms, administration, courts, jury commissioner, clerk, auditor, assessor, counsel, district attorney, personnel, engineering, planning and building, environmental coordinator, and voter registration. Any additional space for these functions should be provided in or close to the County Government Center(Courthouse block). 5.1.5 Health Care There should be a health-care area on Johnson Avenue near Bishop Street (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the health- care area: 59 3-80 Land Use Element SLO General Plan A. Public Health Department; General Hospital; Mental Health Services. B. Other public or private offices or health facilities found to support the continued viability of General Hospital. If County General Hospital is to be rebuilt, the City will evaluate other sites within the City for public health care facilities, including consideration of convenient access from regional transportation systems. 5.1.6 Social Services There should be a social-services area on South Higuera Street near Prado Road (Figure 5). The following functions should be located in the social services area: County Social Services; Califomia Employment Development and Rehabilitation; federal Social Security Administration. This area should have sufficient space to accommodate regional offices of state and federal agencies. 5.1.7 Related Offices Public offices not named in policies 5.1.4, 5.1.5, and 5.1.6, but functionally related to them, should be located in the appropriate area. 5.1.8 Unrelated Offices Public offices not named in policies 5.1.4, 5.1.5, and 5.1.6, and not functionally related to the named offices, should be consolidated at the social services area, or they may be expanded at their present locations or within designated office areas. 5.1.9 Different Offices Government and private activities of types not listed in policies 5.1.4, 5, and 6 may be established in these identified areas, so long as they are compatible with and do not displace the government functions which should be located in the areas. 5.1.10 Other Government Functions Some government functions which have been provided at certain locations in the City should be located close to related " activities, though they should not be bound to any one of the identified centers. Such functions include: A Probation - suitable for the civic center (courts), the County operational center on Highway 1 (sheriff), or the social services area; B. Alcohol and drug treatment programs - suitable for the social-services area or the health-care area. 5.1.11 Consolidation Desired It would be desirable to consolidate government agencies dealing with environmental quality, such as the Regional Water duality Control Board and the County Air Pollution Control District. 60 3-81 p.U•�oz1286 Ssn-Le,-CA 9306-1-286 #LOS)752-9844 / January 19, IM RECEIVED Mr.ArnWdJonas JAN 19 1999 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ca"f Saa4aa`s-0blw -99f}�'aler ,=Luis Obispo, C& 93401 PROMTN[mzbe � -Ek=-98 3450 Broad Street-Acacia Caeek Dear Mr.Jonas, In lePOUSe4o your recent pubiicatioa and4he applicants request for a-Planned MopM09 ova*oftbe CS-S ww, `i rould�ee Y0.Urxesp0nse-to-my comments bearing on this issue. Also, Please advise me of the exact date of the when it has been determifled. I. The coaversioa of a C*mn=VW Sertice to 80%office isnot prudent Pte- AbMstalt the Commereial Smmce is#tris (per 10 ladm ways$road Street)are conveigior3al mdusWWGcnmrCW smwe yrs that are not parking intmEbm 2 Tbecurrem.employee padmg rE4ui &tins-Projectbased on thea Whwnjs subn$ssions shows aref 1.01 emp°yem a of M27 square.-tet whi*yo"tbme v assume%*be off=+Md o - This w0rld-then account for atotal-of 127-empbyee's in itself The project has 136 spaces VAmt-WHI-Iffie custommspak?- Consider fbe traffic mVactat hnich�&z alai &yew leaving for kmch? Com the impact oathe>mmWiate QS't Tmnnr+�„�, consid=theinpad on-the nnmaWjng=off Broad Stmt? 3- 1aayafffie uses cu=g'yproposedaie Mt-eWMAUDWabk in the CS-S zone. Le. Title Company, Government offices(Tri:polar amt),etc. Actually, only two.uses appear consistent with the CS-S zone. PIE and BFGC Architect. 3-82 Fage TWO Ar id Jonas January 19, 1999 4- 17he City&nximg department is antic#acing having a study session in the date near ii4we with the an is ion of mview*the el ofthe CSS eity wide. I feel that, nonsidderaation of allowing a Planned Development overtaY show be postponed or denied until such time as the issue has been discussed and alternatives are established. 5. The fe shore for TIF fm andother impact fm will require creative monitoring based On the variation in uses. Theprimary.motive for ourselves as developers and A==Partners to deveiop4ff e. space Orr lessen expensive CS zoned?and is fmanciagy=&ate . The bottom 1me is that with the sam eve{meUd mmomy baifta}oa a knd, .eve QM Offer reotsWnsi&-nbly louver than propertyzoned Owe arm sail fl�e,�etc �rF c:g:.'�ficant hlg7�e.�man ifs meted to tTka- 'c6m velar' - -- --- ' Playing SeJd"in ibis market We are nW* tO maw an"even and=empt tO maintain some.degsee of cohesive planning-egarts to enhanoe the Tudity of our city. Thme is noshOrtege of properly zoned land in either office or CS categories. Myself and partners are ca;may M the prooessafdevelopmg numerousr:S caned Property lhroxightrt the city andtave attempted to adhere W-tbe-=.y guidelines-for-the-intended CS usage_ Otha developers bane expressed oorrcearr and are actually consider xquestarg blanket Pla:merl Development o=jay Over their parcels to allOwthe loci eased fmaaciai�enefrt of converting_these uses to 100%offce. In this P (Acaem Cm&)-could.crWe a floodgate ofappTmadons *wW-hout the city. . If you are ie support of this appkation in of itspom loeation for office users(Le.mswurs,m� shopping,transportation,ate-) vie wll have to consideras a an application for all 10 bmUsigs,with a planned deve cu>�AeveI pmgA:t the TKBumnat p� lopment Overlay,that we are Your prompt response would be greatly appreciated. V yo o E.DeLucia enc. cz; Run Wbiveo$nd. . -' Pam itivEi ' Council Members 3-83 Proposed Tenant List Acacia Creek Commercial Tri County Regional Center is the proposed tenant for the northwest comer of Acacia Creek. footage of this comer spot is around 7.461- Tri County Regional Center is involved in working square asThe e private contractor tin various state,city and county governments re such their role involves the ttsaal suwunt of office work requirrn garding developmentally disabled persons. As includes but not limited to filling o r d�mg with government entities. lois schedule appointments,con"sei,edueate and c��'etr. Beyond this they work with t�'ieir clients and mental and physical Provide a variety of other services for those individuals with (6//7y6/ however,it is quite 1>7cely fat�Th��te�IoYing around 26 individuals by June of 1996; ��p,� 7 involves ouzzeach services It is people will not be on site at the same time as some of Ute work done f room me which to inform and Possible that they will utilize a large portion of the space as a meeting educate the public on their services. North central section of Acacia Creek is to be Provide wholesale electrical lies contractors. occupied by Pacific Industrial Electric. Their function is to S/!o,tl0 t3 d and will have five full time rnPP �� The space they will be leasing is]0.000 EV re feet employees and perhaps 2 part timeer to yees- and selling. Sales individuals are often out on site with bids andProposalsMuch of their work is stocking / �� Zj . The site on the northeast¢mating Sacramento Soret is y y Drug Rehabilitation. possibly leased b the County of San Luis Obispo will be involved in counseling clients,Y 8II mehO� ca oriented business. Much of the tirne involved in g treatment of drug elated problems,education and doing office work Z S//p�p�0 s� dealing with government policies. They also will have commani meeting room but mainly Office space which is sometimes shared tY meetings and will have a and travel. They plan to have+/_25 employees. Theo members also work in the field J -WThey have looked at 1 U-033jqRare fear 51 The most easterly site located directly on Sacramento site is proposed for use by BFGC Architects. They have looked at 6 850 smuare ft and will use this as office They will also desire a conference or meeting room and Plan space design and draft construction pans. P having 20 employees, e o tions' t 'e 10 t e Cuesta Title Plant is looking at the most southerly spot 4.924 u+„are f � facing Broad Street or Highway 227. The l —�W and will use this as office space to employee 23 to 25 individuals. y have 2 S/ G 92Y`A involved in dealing with the legalities of o . They are mainly i r property. They will be offering escrow and title services. a� F4 .0 z 6/;yep � /�- S 26 5274� 1x7 944y4ev z 5-/ 6, gay 3-84 Chapter 17.46: Chapter 17.44: SERVICE-COMMERCIAL TOURIST-COMMERCIAL (C-T) ZONE (C-S) ZONE Sections: Sections. 17.46.010 Purpose and application. 17.44.010 Purpose and application 17.46.020 Property development standards. 17.44.020 Property development standards. 17.46.010 Purpose and application. 17.44.010 Purpose and application The C-S zone is intended to provide for storage The C-T zone is intended primarily to provide transportation and wholesaling as well as certain retail accommodations and services for the traveling public and sales and business services which my be less will be applied to areas designated"tourist-commerriaar on appropriate in the Citv's other commercial zon . It will be the general plan map. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior applied to areas designated "service-commercial/light code-9203.11(A)) indusbWan the general plan map, typically those areas with more public ex#osure along arterial streets than places reserved for manufacturing. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part). 17.44.020 Property development standards. 1982: prior code-9203.12(A)) The property development standards for the C-T zone are as follows: 17.46.020 Property development standards. A Maximum density: 12 units per net acre, including The property development standards for the C-S zone are dwelling units in hotels and motels,but not including other as follows: hotel or motel units(see also Section 17.16.010). A Yards. Minimum streetyards shall be: B.Yards: See Section 17.16.020. 1. Where no building adjoins, five feet (requirement for C. Maximum coverage: 750A (see also Section parking lots and signs); 17.16.030). D. Maximum height 45 feet(see also Sections 17.16.020 2. For buildings 20 feet and less in height,10 feet; and 17.16.040). 3. For buildings more than 20 feet in height,l5 feet; E. Parking requirements: See Section 17.16.060. (Ord. 4. Other yards shall be as provided in the zone of any 1006-1 (part).1984: Ord.941 -1 (part),1982: priorcode adjacent lot; -9203.11(6)) 5.See also Section 17.16.020. B. Maximum height 35 feet(see also Section 17.16.020 and 17.16.040). C. Maximum coverage: 75% (see also Section 17.16.030). D. Parking requirements: See Section 17.16.060. MY o�san Luis oeispo 74 zonmq aEculatrons 3-85 Chapter 17.32: Chapter 17.34: CONSERVATION /OPEN OFFICE (0) ZONE SPACE (C/OS) ZONE Sections: 1734.010 Purpose and application. 'tions: 1734.020 Property development standards. 2.010 Purpose and application. 2.020 Property development standards. 17.34.010 Purpose and application. The O zone is intended to provide for offices and related 12.010 Purpose and application. functions close to medical C it1es an a downtown, he CIOS zone generally will be applied to areas which convenient to public- nspo on an most suitable for open space uses because of government and business services. It is also intended to graphy, geology, vegetation, soils, wildlife habitat, provide for continuation and development of residential iic prominence,agricultural value or flood hazard uses where they will be compatible with neighboring offices. This zone will be applied to areas designated -he C/OS zone is intended to prevent exposure of "office" on the general plan map.t(Ord. 941 - 1 (part), in developmentto unacceptablerisks posed by natural 1982: prior oode-9203.6(A)) 3rds and to protect natural resources from disruptive ations. To these ends,it is further intended to prevent ;ubd'rvision of such lands. 17.34.020 Property development standards. I will be applied as a The property development standards for the O zone are pp permanent zone to areas as follows: gnated "conservation/open space" or "park" on the .ral plan map. It may also be applied to area A Maximum density: 12 dwelling units per net acre(see gnated "interim conservation/open space" where also Section 17.16.010). alopmentis contingent on prerequisites identified in the .ral plan text (Ord.941 - 1(part), 1982: prior code- B.Yards: See Section 17.16.020. 3.5(A)) C. Maximum height 25 feet; 35 feet with the approval of an administrative use permit in compliance with Section 2.020 Property development standards. 1722.010, Table 9, Footnote 11 (Also see Sections property development standards for the C/OS zone 17.16.020 and 17.16.040.) is follows: D.Maximum coverage: 60%(see also Section 17.16.030. aximum density: One dwelling per five or moreacres, dicated in the zone designation. E Paridng requirements: See Section 17.16.060. (Ord. 1088 - 1 Ex. A(4), 1987; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982 prior linimum parcel size: Five or more acres,as noted in code-9203.6(6)) iumberwhich is part of the zone designation(C(OS-40 ires forty acres). C' linimum street yard: 20 feet linimum other yards: 20 feet :a)dmum height 35 feet a)dmum coverage: 20%. =;c QLy OF San LUIS OBISPO 69 zonmc,aequlations 3-86 Y, r . I F i ti f ti Table 9-Uses Allowed by Zone �.. WI v Table 9-Uses Allowed Zone - r �1 r �',..'-r�W� tial- mem _ •• ' y= cr-.''■� M-!-.1■ ■ It- s n ��1fll M_ 'cam- r•--•rcv„x3 P-7-77. U-6 -T-1 IN I �1• L �W �. in• y+ � �+�+ � MEN MMMMMMOMMM -ri h ' ti a M s s TIE&I's U c r _ iI(•i �-V SEE[{{F. i t ' L EEL From: Hal Hannula To: JRenny Date: 12/16/98 1:49pm Subject: 3450 Broad, Accacia Creek PD Amendment I was just informed by Pults office that Hamish will be proposing a PD Amendment to allow offices in this new service-commercial shell building. For what it's worth, they paid TIF based on a service-commercial shell building which by policy was the highest allowed use in the zone/PD approval. As you recall, when we were establishing policies on collecting the TIF, we did not want to evaluate collecting fees with each tenant improvement. Therefore, the only way to collect the additional TIP's would be to condition the Planning approval. It would be best to not rely on the building permit process for the collecting of an additional fees if applicable. t 3-89 WestPAc January 20, 1999 Mr. Arnold Jonas Community Development Director City of San Luis Obispo 990 Pahn Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: 3450 Broad Street-Acacia Creek Dear Mr. Jonas: In response to Mr DeLucia's letter dated January 19, 1999 I would hike to point out some salient facts that I believe Mr DeLucia may have misinterpreted or failed to recognize. 1. We are only requesting that 69% of the building be allowed to be occupied by office users, not 80%which is allowed in a CS zone with a PD overlay. We are NOT trying to attempt something that has never been done before. There are many examples of properties within the City that are zoned CS with a PD overlay that are used for office space: a)West Wind Business Park b)The Brick Yard c)Cross Roads d)The Marigold Center e)The All State Building f)Auto Park way g)An Office Building on South Higuera weawiiawaiLux h)A Vacant piece of land on South Higuera "XdKAfII (Please refer to attachment.) 2. Yes, there are approximately 127 employees if all of these tenants commit to a lease. However, as Mr. DeLucia pointed out, not all of these employees are full time, nor will all the tenants drive to work Mr DeLuda also failed to recognize that we have increased our parking to 140 spaces plus the additional off street parking(11-13 spaces) that will be created through the widening of Sacramento Street. (Paid for By Acacia Creek) Westpac Imcstments,Inc. 1880 Sam Ikvb=9Uw4 Suite F Sen Ins Obispo,CA 80401 8 7W-FAXaaswun 3-90 Page Two PD Overlay-Acacia Creek January 20, 1999 3. The reason for requesting a PD overlay is that we have tenants who are unable to find space anywhere else in town and who are appropriate in this zone with a PD overlay. The larger office space availability in town has become nearly non-existent or highly over priced. This often means that many local and some outside businesses cannot afford to lease in San Luis Obispo. We at Acacia Creek have the opportunity to fill,what we believe, is a huge market need. Furthermore we are not asking the City to make any decisions that are NOT in-line with the general plan. 4. When this project was first approved, we where told that parking was going to play a large role in deciding which tenants could occupy the building. We understood that we could only fill the building to the extent that the parking allowed. We are able to park every tenant on-site, and we are NOT requesting any parking credits. 5. The environmental study was completed last week and no adverse effects where found by placing a PD overlay on the site as long as we could mitigate parking on-site. We have been able to do this. 6. Mr.Del alaa talks about having an even playing field within the City. After reading his letter, I can only assume that Mr DeLucia is trying very hard to create his own playing field. It is not common practice to oppose another developer's project. I am as surprised by his letter as I am by his false and incorrect information- With nformation.W th these examples and reasons in mind,I would have to disagree with Mr. DeLucia's continent that the City would be setting a precedent by approving a PD overlay on Acacia Creek I question the motives behind Mr. DeLucia's letter of January 19, 1999 and I would ask the City to do the same. It is my belief;and the belief of the perspective tenants,that Acacia Creek IS ideally located for their particular needs. As long as the parking is not compromised,there is no reason why the proposed tenants should not be allowed to occupy Acacia Creek and a PD overlay granted for the property. Sincerely you Banish Marshall Vice President Developmem 3-91 'III• •�♦ � `,��I.\� OI•� ♦ ♦/111111 ��`,,,, • , 1,iii i.::a►i1� 'Z '? 1 ,,. _''�� � � nwt = o�I •� � ',, �, ti G=_1111_ _-__ _'_•� MONS it.)' LINE Mon 11 all mmff� WA rg I I I i 11111 tltlll IIIIIIo==_'-p` 1 �► =5r � 1 1 p O•• d •••�• :• PJ Jp d0 ��. I jt i . I II January 21, 1999 RECEIVED ,IAN 2? 1999 CITY of SAN LUIS oeISPO Arnold Jonas COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development Director City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: PD Overlay Zoning Request 3450 Broad Street, Acacia Creek Dear Arnold: As Architect for the referenced project, I wanted to provide some background in relation to the current PD Overlay zoning request. Evidently some questions have been raised regarding the appropriateness of the proposed rezoning for this particular building. When we originally designed this project, there were no proposed tenants. Since we had no specifics on who might use the space, we designed the building with as much flexibility as possible. We approached the design with a higher standard than would normally be associated with a "Commercial Service" project. We provided more parking, more windows, additional employee outdoor areas and so on. With its Broad Street frontage, a major entry corridor to the City, we wanted the design to reflect a business park feeling, not auto repair and welding shops. The site, with Acacia Creek running through it, presented a much nicer setting than would normally be found in a commercial service area. It also created many challenges for development; an existing riparian habitat, a new City bike path which transverses the site, and the Broad Street frontage and related improvements. We worked closely with many City departments and Cal Trans to solve the problems and create a project that we could all be proud of. This building is naturally suited for the PD zone request. It is a large building, over 50,000 square feet, which is geared toward larger tenants. It is well parked, the calculations speak for themselves, it meets all City requirements for the proposed uses. It is located in a unique area that transitions from the commercial service area across Sacramento Drive to the Brickyard and Cross Roads shopping and office areas. This project is unique. Its location, size, parking, site amenities, and building design are all out of the ordinary for a Commercial Service Zone. We believe that the project is exactly what the PD Overlay Zone was created for. A ndWectum,Planning&Grapbla 3-93 1401 ftuera Streel Sari Luis Obispo,California 93401 805/5415604 If you have any questions, or r need additional information please.give me a call.. _ efy,�'. Steven D. Pults, AIA Project .Architect cc: Pam.'Ricci 3=94 ��IIII ""a'p II city osAn luis omspo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ER 201-98 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Acacia Creek Commercial PD 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Pamela Ricci, Associate Planner (805) 781-7168 4. Project Location: 3450 Broad Street 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Acacia Creek LLC, A Limited Liability Corporation 555 Ramona San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Services & Manufacturing 7. Zoning: C-S-S, Service Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning 3-95 © The Gty of San tuts Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. Teteeommunieations Device fpr the Deaf(665)7131-7410. S. Description of the Project: The project proposes to add the Planned Development overlay zoning to the site to enable large office tenants, consistent with Land Use Element policy 3.3.2 E, which states that large offices, with no single tenant space less than 2,500 square feet, and having no substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services, may be in the Services and Manufacturing districts, subject to approval of a Planned Development (PD) zoning application. 9. Project Entitlements Requested: The applicant has applied for environmental review and the PD rezoning. 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The site contains 3.7 acres and is currently in the process of being developed with a new, approximately 48,000 square-foot, commercial building, parking areas, bicycle path and landscaping. The property has frontage on both Broad Street and Sacramento Drive. Acacia Creek crosses the site in the northwestern corner. Significant vegetation includes a number of trees near the creek. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None. 2 3-96 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. Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems Hazards Recreation Water Noise Mandatory Findings Of Significance Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation Systems 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. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, then will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on a 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 a 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 a 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 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, then 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. 3 3-97 January 12, 1999 'gnatu a Date Ronald Whisenand, Development Review Manager for Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. Printed Name EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. 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 CEGA 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 3-98 Issues and Supporting Inform. .... Sources Soaroms PL PotrntiaRy Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Lunt Unless Impact ER 201-98 mitigation Page 5 Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1,2 X b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or-policies adopted by agencies with.jurisdiction over the project? X c) Be incompatible with existing land-use in the vicinity? X d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land X uses? e) Disrupt or divide the physical- arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or X minor)ty;.community)? . The site is designated for "Services and Manufacturing' on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map. The LUE encourages a wide range of uses, including "business services, wholesaling, building contractors, utility company yards, auto repair, printing, food manufacturing and other light manufacturing, and retail sales of large items, bulk quantities, and items often stored outdoors (vehicles, building materials, plants)." The LUE also mentions 'convenience restaurants and other activities primarily serving area workers' as appropriate types of uses. LUE Section 3.5.2 F., Appropriate Uses, allows for'large offices', with the proper approvals. Therefore, as explained above under Project Description, the application for a Planned Development,PD, zoning is consistent with LUE office policies. The project site is currently zoned C-S-S, Service Commercial with the Special Consideration overlay zoning, as are the properties to the direct north. Properties to the east and south are either zoned M, Manufacturing, or M-S, Manufacturing with the Special Consideration overlay zoning. The sites to the west across Broad Street are undeveloped and located outside the City limits. There are residential properties to the further northwest. The 'S' overlay requires the processing of an administrative use permit with development to insure that the particular special considerations associated with this site are addressed. The special considerations with this site include: its location along Highway 227 and concerns for area-wide circulation impacts; the need for various frontage improvements with development; and the location of a portion of the riparian corridor of Acacia Creekwithin the site. The required use permit was approved on December 5, 1997, and processed concurrently with architectural plans for the shell building. The use permit was conditioned to limit the range of uses allowed at the site that might raise either compatibility or parking issues. The applicant has now applied for the Planned Development overlay zoning at the site to enable the establishment of large offices (defined as having a minimum floor area of 2,500 square feet). Zoning regulations implement LUE policy through Note 10 following Table 9 - Uses Allowed by Zone which provides for establishing large offices in the C-S and M zones,subject to PD zoning approval. Office uses typically characterized by substantial public visitation or need for access to downtown government services,such as banks, real estate offices,financial institutions,medical and legal offices,are prohibited. Findings which the Planning Commission and City Council must make in approving a PD zoning for large offices are outlined in zoning regulations Section 17.62.040 C. The Commission and Council must also find that uses allowed as part of a PD rezoning are consistent with the General Plan (Section 17.50.020). Conclusion: The applicant's processing of the PD rezoning is the appropriate way to request large offices at this site. No further mitigation is recommended. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING -Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population 5 3-99 Issues and Supporting Inform,_.. Sources SOW= y Potratially Less Thm No Significt significant Signifiemt tmpaa ER 201-98 tssm untms hapad Page 6 mmgadon mwrporated projections? X b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area. X or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable. housing? X With approval of the PD rezoning, some large-scale offices could be established at the site. It is not anticipated that potentially allocating more space within the building to a wider range of office uses would directly affect the supply of City-wide housing. The PD may result in increased numbers of people working in some of the proposed tenant spaces. However, assuming an increased number of employees is speculative since certain types of office uses are already allowed by right with the underlying zoning. Therefore, any increase in anticipated employees and customers at the site is not a large enough number to significantly increase population levels or create a demand for new housing. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result m:or expose people::to.potential unpacts involving: a). fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking? X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? X d) Seiche, tsunami, or-.volcanic hazard? X e) Landslides or mudflows? X f) Erosion, changes in.topography or unstable.soil conditions from excavation; grading, or fill? X g) Subsidence of the land? X h) Expansive soils? F]q X i) Unique geologic or physical features? I X The project site is generally flat and is already developed with the commercial building, parking lot areas an landscaping. Impacts to subsurface geology were previously analyzed with project development plans (E 88-97). 4. WATER. Would.the Proposal result in: a) Changes in absorptionrates, drainagepatterns, or the X rate and amount of surface runoff? X b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards: such as flooding? 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? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? X The project site is generally flat and is already developed with commercial uses. Project plans took int account the need for facilities and improvements to accommodate site drainage and to protect Acacia Creek 6 3-100 Issues and Supporting Inform_..:Sources Sot= Pc toteatiatly �T an No Signifiema Signifitmt Sigaifieam Impact I Ualm Impact ER 201-98 mitigation Page 7 Ncapoidcd 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute.to an existing or.projected.:a)r quality violation (Compliance X with ARCD=Environmental,Guidelines)? b) Expose sensitive receptors:to-pollutants X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or-temperature, or cause any change in climate? X d) Create objectionable:odors? X Approval of the PD zoning will allow for the expansion of the types- but not necessarily affect the proportion of office uses allowed because existing zoning already allows construction,architecture,and engineering offices with no limit on the leasable area which these uses could occupy. Therefore,earlier mitigation measures approved with project development plans will adequately address air quality impacts. 6. TRANSPORTATIONICIRCULATION '.Would;the proposal result im a) Increased vehiclearips:or-..tn3ffic;:congestion? X b) Hazards to.safety from design features(e.g.sharp: ' curves or dangerous,'ioteisections)':or incompatible uses X (e. farm equipment))?;. c) Inadequate emergency access or access to:nearby _. X .uses d) Insufficient parking.capacity::on-siite:oroff-site? X e) Hazards:or barriers forpedestrians'or bicyclists? X f) Conflicts wrtlis adopted poli aes`snpportin alternative ' transportation (e:g:'bus°turnouts ?bicycle racks)? :: X g) Rail;waterborne or:;*:.Araffic,impacts,le.gm compatibility with San Luis>Obispo:Co - X Approval of the PD zoning will allow for the expansion of the types- but not necessarily affect the proportion of office uses allowed because existing zoning already allows construction, architecture, and engineerin offices with no limit on the leasable area which these uses could occupy. Therefore, earlier mitigation measures approved with project development plans will adequately address traffic impacts. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Wouf& er:proposal:afect: a) Endangered,-threatenedor rare species:ortheir.habitats (including but not limited.to::plarits;fish,Jnsects ' X animals or birds)? b) Locally.designated species,(e.g.:h6ritage.trees)? X c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc:)? X d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? X e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X S. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.' Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region X and the residents of the State? The proposed project's type and scale do not depend on the use of large amounts of energy. There are n known mineral resources that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: 7 3-101 Issues and Supporting Inform.._.,.. ciources Sow= Po. • j Powntially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant impact ER 201-98 blues Unien � mitigation Page 8 incmporated 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 10. NOISE. -Would:th " posalein:ero a) Inerease'::in.:d)c"ng noise levels? .. X b) Exposureof-people';to '.unacceptable' noise1evels:.as. defined by the-San_Luis Obispo-General Plan Noise X Office uses are generally quieter than many service and light industrial types of uses allowed in the C- zone. Therefore, the establishment of additional office uses may actually have a positive impact on ambieni noise conditions at the site. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES:. Would.the;proposal Have an effect upon,or resultin wheed for new or altered' govemmertsernces1n:any of idiilolliiwingiareas: a)_ Fire-protection? X b)- Police:protection_ ?. X c) Schools?.::- . X d) Maintenanceof public facilities, including roads? X e) Other governmental services? X 12- UTILITIES AND-:SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for newsystems or supplies, or substantial Iterations to.the"following uLTities: a) Power or natural:-gas?: X b) Communications.:systems? X c) Local'or regional watertreatment or distribution facilRies?` X d) Sewer or-septic-tanks? X e)' Storm water drainage? X f) Solid waste disposal? X g) Local or regional water supplies? X 13. AESTHETICS. Would:the.proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic-highway? X b) Have a demonstrable'negative aesthetic effect? X c) Create light or glare? X The proposed PD zoning will allow a wider range of office uses, but will have no impact on the physics appearance of the site. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? X 8 3-102 Issues and Supporting Inform:....,.: Sources Sour= Po. . r Poteoaaiiy tenTban No Significant Significant Significant [tnpact ER 201-98 tmIs Unles impact alifigation Page 9 1 Ppotftd c) Affect historical resources? X d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X e) Restrict existing.religious or sacred uses within the potentialimpact area? X 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:. a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? X b) Affect existing.recreational:opportunities? X 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 oranimal or eliminate important .examples of the major..periods of California history::or Prehistory? The initial study for project development plans, ER 88-97, concluded that, with certain mitigation, th construction and occupancy of the commercial building on this site would have no significant adve environmental impacts. The current application for PD zoning to allow some of the tenants to be large professional office uses does not raise any new issues related to environmental impact since existing zonin allows construction,architecture,and engineering offices with no limit on theleasable area which these uses could occupy. Approval of the PD zoning would simply expand the types - but not necessarily affect the proportion-of office uses allowed. b) Does the project-have the potential to achieve short- term;to the disadvantage of long-term; environmental 1 X goals? FT _ See explanation under 16. a. c) Does the project.have..:impacts that:are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively X considerable' means that the incremental effects of a 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)_ See explanation under 16. a. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, X either directly or indirectly? See explanation under 16. a. 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 ID). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: 9 3-103 Issues and Supporting Inform...,.. Sources Sources po.. . .iy potentially [=Than No significant Significant significant impact ER 201-98 Issues mess impact Ivition Page 10 incmpoorated a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. A Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures, Initial Study ER 88-97, was prepared for the actual development plans for the Acacia Creek project. It was approved on December 5, 1997, by the Administrative Hearing Officer along with the required use permit (A 88-97), because of the site's 'S', Special Consideration overlay zoning. This study is available for review in project files located in the City's Community Development Department at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which. effects from the above checklist were within the scop of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and stat .whether such effects were addressed by mitigation.measures based on the earlier-analysis. None. The reference to the earlier study was made to document that the full impacts of development were previously analyzed. This study focuses on the requested PD overlay zoning and what physical impact there may be tied to that approval. c) Mitigatiownleasures. For effects that are."Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated;" describe the mitigation ineasures which were incorporated or refined from:the earlier document and the extent t which they:address-site specific conditions`of:the project. Not applicable. Authority: Public.Resources Code Sections.21 O83 and 21087. Reference:Public.:Resources Code Sections 21080 (c) , 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21:093, 321094,24151;.Sunds rom v. County of Mendocino, 202 CaL App.:3d 296 (-1988);Leonofff v. Monterey Board of:Supervisors, '222 Cal. App:3d 1::337 (1990). 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. General Plan Land Use Element text and map, city of San Luis Obispo, updated August 1994, and including subsequent amendments. 2. Zoning Regulations and map, City of San Luis Obispo, dated 2-21-97. 10 3-104 MEETI G AGENDA a RECEIVED DATE 99 ITEM #= APR - 6 1999 MEMORANDUM SLO CITY CLERK TO: Councilperson Marx FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director �O DATE: Apri16, 1999 SUBJECT: PD District Zoning For Large Offices You have have expressed reservations concerning the process used to apply PD zoning to the C-S and M zoning Districts to accommodate large offices. The following information is provided to clarify how-this process came about. In 1985-86 the City commissioned, and ultimately accepted, a consultant produced study that revealed a deficiency of large office space(2,500 square feet or more) in the community. In March of 1987, after extensive public hearings,the City Council amended the General Plan, and adopted Ordinance 1087 which modified the provisions of the PD District,to allow the consideration of large offices in the C-S and M Zones. A separate set of findings was incorporated into the PD Zone dealing specifically and exclusively with large offices. There are no provisions limiting the application of the PD District only to vacant property for large office purposes, or for other uses for that matter. From the beginning of implementation of the large office provisions in 1987, and in fact with the very first application, and four of the first five,PD zoning has been applied to existing development as well as vacant land. In the case of existing development where no other changes than land use are considered, only the large office findings are applied. In those cases where vacant land is also included (in whole or in part) and physical design considerations come into play,the basic PD findings as well as the large office findings are made. Since the large office provisions have been in existence, nine applications have been considered for large office PD, with five of those applications containing existing structures. If the current Council is uncomfortable with the provisions of the ordinance as written, or with allowing large office uses in the C-S or M zones, direction should be given to staff to initiate desired changes to the Zoning Ordinance, General Plan, or both as appropriate. c: Mayor and City Council City Administrative Officer FEr'CLEWORIC01 COD DIR City Attorney 0 FIN DIR 0 FIRE CHIEF 0 PW DIR 0 POLICE CHF 0 REC0 UTIL DIR 0 PERS DIR // .1!:..IIIVl7 AVtNUA TE W-6-9 9 ITEM # Co;=_ mcmomnaum March 31, 1999 W�;QUNCII CDD DIR ❑ FIN DIR TO: Council Colleagues /ICAO ❑ F�1E CHIEF eague ��.iTORNEY ��:J DIR CLEflKIORIG ❑ Pu!.'CE CHF FROM: Jan Howell Marx C3 ItGMT TEAM E3 R"cC DIR O 13UTI1. DIR O ❑ PERS DIR SUBJECT: Communication Item Attached is information describing Maplewood Farm which is operated by the Parks & Recreation Department in No. Vancouver. This is an example of a model farm operated by a city which could be utilized on the Dalidio property or other property preserved in agriculture in our city. Attachment MAPLEWOOD FARM 405 Seymour River Place North Vancouver, B.C. V71-1 1S6 Phone: 929-5610 EMORIAc COPY Children and adults alike will enjoy a taste of life on a real farm at Maplewood Farm in North Vancouver's Dollarton area. The 2 hectare (5 acre) farm - which can be reached from the Second Narrows Bridge, heading north, by taking the Dollarton exit #236 - was first settled in the early 1900's. Since then, it has become home to a number of thriving farm operations and was purchased by the District of North Vancouver, Partes Department, in 1970. In 1975, Maplewood Farm was opened for the public to enjoy. Today, families and school tours are still having fun and learning from the Farm's many displays, demonstrations and approximately 200 animals and birds. At the ticket booth, which used to be the office for the dog breeding business once operated on the farm, visitors can pay for their admission, $1.61 for children and seniors, $2.14 for adults, and if they wish to feed the birds, buy a bag of seed for $1.00 a bag. Then its off to visit the goat kids in "Goathill" - watch out, they have a habit of chewing on loose bits of clothing or shoe laces. Feed the rabbits any fruits and vegetables you may have brought with you and see a number of other animals and birds including cows, a Belgium Draft horse and ponies, pigs, sheep, donkeys and different kinds of duck and fowl. At 1:15 p.m. daily, farm visitors can watch a demonstration of hand milking in the Livestock Barn and ask questions of the farm attendant. Throughout their stay at the farm, visitors will notice farm attendants feeding the animals, cleaning the pens and paddocks and doing various other farm chores. s EDITORIAL-PAGE 2 . The Farm offers four fun, family-oriented special events per year. SHEEP FAIR- held on the last Sunday in May, visitors can see carding, weaving and spinning of wool and watch sheep being shom and worked by a border collie dog. FARM FAIR - held on the weekend after the Labour Day holiday in September, offers two jam-packed days of music, entertainment, olde-fashinioned games & activities. A must for the whole family. ONE HUNDRED & ONE PUMPKIN EVENT- held in October. This event offers a free pumpkin to the first 101 families with kids in costume. Also, grow your own pumpkin and enter it into our PUMPKIN GROWING CONTEST where you may very well win a prize ribbon to take homel COUNTRY CHRISTMAS - held each year on the second weekend in December. Here you can listen to carollers performing seasonal favorites in the Livestock Barn. Warm up with a stroll through the greenhouse, decorated in the spirit of Christmas. MAPLEli(001) FARM is open daily, except non-holiday Mondays and Christmas Day from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The Fart is located at 405 Seymour River Place. For more information, please call (604) 929-5610 or fax (604) 929-9341. � � CA M CL a Fr F _ y S � L � � L n � O Q q 7 2P A A f0 O 2 rS j I C It 0 o5F m e n' 7 C O O r = d d n n n 7a 7 O C O raa o CL 90 �! 3 w ? d ro oCni a. O rOo y ro � �• rn 0• O v, d O.. C G � 'J_ NO � t( ._— ] n(• T .,1 '0999•{{{"` �, F4� fp'�' 1 av 1 'ryr� T!,,'mi� lk • _ t4 SY. 'T i� �C{,� ��7f�� � fes• -1, � _ P: " yl -i J ` l f •�a r