Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/07/2000, 3 - PACIFIC BELL, A&R WELDING, AND FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATIONS: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ANNEX AND PREZONE THREE CONTIGUOUS SITES WITH A TOTAL AREA OF ROUGHLY 12 ACRES AT 196 SUBURBAN ROAD AND 205 AND 204 TANK FARM ROAD RESPECTIVELY. (ANNX/R/ Meai.�D.te council March 7 200 j ac EnbA nEpont , 3N . CITY O F SAN LUIS 0 B I S P O FROM: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director Prepared By: Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner l SUBJECT: PACIFIC BELL, A&R WELDING, AND FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATIONS: Consideration of a request to annex and prezone three contiguous sites with a total area of roughly 12 acres at 196 Suburban Road and 205 and 204 Tank Farm Road respectively. (ANNX/R/ER 213-99, 188-99, and 206-99) CAO RECOMMENDATION a) Pass to print an ordinance adopting the mitigated negative declarations of environmental impact (ER 213-99, 188-99, and 206-99) and prezoning the annexation areas Manufacturing (M) and Service Commercial (C-S). b) Adopt a resolution recommending that LAFCo approve the annexations. C) Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute pre-annexation agreements with the applicants providing for payment of fees consistent with the interim annexation policy. DISCUSSION Situation The applicants are proposing to annex three properties along Tank Farm and Suburban Roads into the City of San Luis Obispo pursuant to the City's Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy. Because the three sites are contiguous, the staff report addresses all three applications. The applicants have also filed applications with the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), which authorizes annexation. City and LAFCo policies require that the Planning Commission and City Council determine the appropriate zoning(referred to as"prezoning")for the sites to be annexed. Planning Commission Review J At its meeting on January 26, 2000, the Planning Commission reviewed the annexation requests. The Planning Commission staff report and minutes are attached. On a vote of 6-0-0 "(Commissioner Senn refrained due to a potential conflict of interest), the Commission agreed to forward a recommendation to the Council to adopt the mitigated negative declarations, as amended; prezone the A&R Welding and Farm Supply sites Service Commercial (C-S) and the Pacific Bell site Manufacturing (M); and recommend 3-1 Pacific Bell,A&R Welding, Farm Supply Annexations March 7,2000 Page 2 that LAFCo approve the annexations. Commissioners agreed that the proposed annexations are a logical addition to the City. Discussion focused on proposed development plans, and mitigation measures for soil contamination, energy conservation, solid waste and recycling. The applicants have all agreed to mitigations measures as modified by the Commission for these items. Data Summary Applicants: David Erbstoesser, A&R Welding (205 Tank Farm Road) Jill Viggiano, Pacific Bell (196 Suburban Road) Jim Brabeck, Farm Supply Company (204 Tank Farm Road) Property Owners: Thomas, David, and Timothy Erbstoesser(205 Tank Farm Road) Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company(196 Suburban Road) Unocal Corporation(204 Tank Farm Road) Representatives: Pults and Associates(A&R Welding) Cannon and Associates (Fane Supply and Pacific Bell) County Zoning: Commercial-Service City General Plan: Services and Manufacturing Environmental Status: The Director determined the projects required mitigated negative declarations of environmental impact on January 19, 2000. Action Deadline: Legislative projects are not subject to permit streamlining. Site Descriptions and Development Plans Pacific Bell: The 4.3 acre Pacific Bell site at 196 Suburban Road is currently developed with a utility corporation yard and engineering and administrative offices. It is a flag shaped lot with a driveway extending to Tank Farm Road between the Spice Hunter and the A&R Welding properties. No further site development is proposed at this time. (ANNX/R/ER 213-99) A&R Welding: The 2.9 acre A&R Welding site, immediately to the north of the Pacific Bell site at 205 Tank Fane Road, is partially developed with gas distributor business that occupies two buildings and a storage yard. The applicant is proposing to develop the vacant 1.76 acres of the site with a 23,000 square foot commercial building. (ANNX/R/ER 188-99) Farm Supply: The 4.9 acre Farm Supply site, across Tank Farm Road to the northeast of A&R Welding at 204 Tank Farm Road, is vacant and has been used for fanning. Farm Supply wishes to relocate its business to this site. The development plan submitted shows a proposal for 32,000 square feet of building area for office, retail and storage uses and an outdoor plant nursery. (ANNX/R/ER 204-99) All three sites are relatively flat. Surrounding land uses include agriculture and other service-commercial and manufacturing operations. 3-2 Pacific Bell,A&R Welding,and Farm Supply Annexations March 7,2000 Page 3 Analysis of Annexation and Prezone The City's Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy allows property to be considered for annexation prior to the adoption of the Airport Area Specific Plan provided certain standards are met. As pointed out in the attached Planning Commission staff report, the proposed annexations meet these standards and comply with applicable General Plan criteria. The applicants have agreed to contribute to the cost of preparing the Airport Area Specific Plan, sharing the cost of constructing area-wide infrastructure improvements, and contributing towards open space preservation according to the terms of the interim policy. The remainder of the costs will be paid or secured by a letter of credit as outlined in the attached pre-annexation agreements. The Planning Commission determined that the most appropriate zoning category is Service-Commercial (C-S) for the properties fronting on Tank Farm Road and Manufacturing (M) for the property fronting on Suburban Road. These zoning districts implement the General Plan land use designation of Services and Manufacturing. The existing and planned uses of the property are consistent with the purposes of the C-S and M zoning district. Future development will require possible land use permits and architectural review in accordance with City standards and guidelines. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt a resolution denying the annexations and prezonings. 2. Continue action with direction. Attachments Ordinance adopting the Negative Declarations and prezoning the properties to C-S and M Resolution requesting LAFCO proceedings Resolution for project denial Applicant acceptance of mitigation measures Planning Commission staff report including Initial Studies Planning Commission minutes Pre-Annexation Agreements 3-3 Cie +� �'ytl,{t+y.. yV�1„ '.,�:i o r 1� }fie .,l S.. �,yr I..y1 �Laf tf t r.iX 4�.y "a j c r f�f" "!rIL •r' ti _ '* "]S ''`4 r`r��''A r•1H ,1 i 3Lq,vk r s _ 1 4 Itel 4 u� { 4. - -f1 1 ^ a �`•�t ,r"t-Si�+� .,13 i i ryrj o�s !,. cu , f ,y ;tia rv(. t•• J �'itr`.I rs 4':+'7d ,F`ff. F 6`•r."�+.1. (•f•.�. ryL1 - ` o- _ r � t ORDINANC•EINO' (2000 Senes) 4. Ij�•!:ti a, .c't.Y Y n � ..,'.a�"1t�aVGt -. .. '+ AN ORDINANCE'OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CM OF SAN: , TO 'AMEND THE OFFICIAL--'ZONING MAP TO PREZONE APPROXIMATELY 43 ACRES AT 196 SUBURBAN ROAD r+ MANUFACTURING; APPROXIMATELY 2:9 ACRES AT 205 TANK FARM " Iva s� ROAD SERVIC&COMMERCIAL, AND APPROXIMATELY 4:9 ACRES AT_204 V- '�`TANK FARM ROAD SERVICE-COMMERCIAL `*V,1(R/ANNVER: 213i-99, 18809; AND 206-99) . �w ti� } r•'a = W IEREAS, the tPlanning Commission 'conducted a public hearing on January k, 26, 2000 and"recommendedLprezoning theproposed'annexation sites Service Commerciale (C-S)'and Manufacturing (M)as shown in Exhibit A ;and � ' : J"` 1+"{a k' , , I, <. S•t 7� Y 'r J�',h+- fNn.l +.+ +�'. WHEREAS;the City'Council conducted a public hearing' on March 7, 2000 has considered stunony of',interested- persons, the.Tecorcls of the.Planning Commission ` hearing n&. -ction,wand evaluation and recommendations of s_taff'in accordance 'with">Lz 4% Section 65900tet Aseq.,of the•California Government'Code; and. WHEREAS, 'the .potential environmental impacts of the cfiange have' evaluated, in(accoidance'.Mth,the.California Envifonmental Quality Act,(C City Envtroninentah6, Uidelines: m �'•x� r �� ,, :z �• =.J .. tin rp 1 t � �� -_tYr ,{�j+-("W 2�+� mV'��nr: BE I'T ORDAINED by the Council of the.City of San Luis Obispo as follows �b,Lf •A '' 1 r. SECTIONwl TM City Council finds and &terhiinds that the projects' mitigated ` 7' Negative,Dec„1iif tions (ER 213-99; 188=99; and 206-99) adequately address'the potential i '� k sign cant environmental impacts of the proposed projects, and reflect,the independent i r judgment of�°they City Council- The Council hereby :adopts said mitigated Negative) Declarations:.• SECTION,2 The City.Council makes the.followi`ng findings li. Prezoiung the annexation area Service Commercial (C S) and Manufadfdring• ash§frown-°on attached Exhibit A; is,consistent with the General 'Plan lan$mouse° ,,' designation of Services and lvlaiiufacturing 2. Prezoiung"the annexation area-Service,Commercial (C=S)and Manufacturing as shown on attached Exhibit A; is consistent witli the intended use and`location of'C-&,and M Toned properties as d6kribed'in the 2oiung regulations;• L 3. A prezorung-of Service Commercial and Manufacturing is ,appropriate at the propo,•sed�;locations and will,be compatible wiih surrounding land uses)which amore v' r --- - i prunanly service commercial,;manufacturing, and agricultural in`_nature,and Un J i it t+'y '41t J] Yir �: h �.. + 117• ! `7.`�Ip'r. ` v <i + Y >h ti w .Y�� �k�+i 1 `a_ r .c �/�,,,•. .�.c -.k 1 pF ,{•` 'A- C ''. y. 1ct. � �Nl +.B+F r).- = h I .I1 i Ordinance No. (2000 Series) J Pacific Bell;A&R Welding;and Farm Supply Prezoning Page 2 4. The prezoning will not.have a significant adverse effect on the environment. SECTION 3. The annexation area shall be prezoned Servic&Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (1) as shown on the attached map marked Exhibit A. and included herein by reference. SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance; together with the mine"s of:Colincil members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior t&its finali. passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said.city:`Thi'' ordinance shall go into effect upon the date of final action by the City Councif on`the. annexation. INTRODUCED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Council of the Citysof'San- Luis Obispo :. : .. at its meeting held on the _ day of , 2000, on motion of seconded by __ __ _.. , and on the following roll call`xofe: AVE-9- NOES- ABSENT: YES:NOES:ABSENT: u Mayor Allen Settle, ATTEST: • I: City Clerk Lee Price APPROVED AS TO FORM: ity o ey J f J ensen T T u z r V• ;t' 4:• 4 ,:� J r J .- R. `RA—Q I Gam` r e'"{Z _ Ivr 'Y•1 Farm Supply PadM Driveway Prezone ctiS - m ne C�_ _ _.rezzo __ - - ID I'• GOS-20 _ - AM Wel dor (Prezone C-S) . _ -- GS-S T._Jklk l ti IW F - :77- ( _ • i 1. 1 M 1 � /i V q C I I 'I • i M1_ I ' GS K N �e� n r i !°CityLimit Line Urban Reserve Line. /1 iWr_f A eaI. t i Specific Plan Boundary _ 200 0- 200_400 Feet` —.v Concurrerrtly Froposedi EXIS•tlhd ana M6POS6 Annexation Areas ' f _ so_o. -too' meiers.. . . , - � ;. . � zoninG bEsiGnattons --so—loo' •�, .�'L EXH.B Y 1IT�„eA RESOLUTION NO. (2000 Series) A RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION BY THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING THAT THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION APPROVE ANNEXATIONS OF PROPERTIES AT 196 SUBURBAN ROAD AND 205 AND 204 TANK FARM ROAD FOR PACIFIC BELL,A&R WELDING,AND FARM SUPPLY RESPECTIVELY (ANNX/R/ER 213-99, 188-99,and 206-99) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have held hearings on the proposed annexations on January 26, 2000, and March 7, 2000 respectively;.and WHEREAS, the City Council on March 7, 2000, by Ordinance No. (2000 Series), approved a Negative Declaration for the proposed annexation, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15090; and WHEREAS, on recommendation of the Planning Commission and as a result of its deliberations, the Council has approved an amendment of the Zoning Map by prezoning the annexation properties to Service Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (M) as shown on the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, City Council approval is a prerequisite for the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission to initiate formal annexation proceedings; and WHEREAS, the territory to be annexed is uninhabited, and a description of the boundaries of the territory is set forth in attached Exhibits B and C; and WHEREAS, this proposal is consistent with the sphere of influence of the affected city; BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1: Findings. 1. Annexation is appropriate since the sites are contiguous to the City. 2. Annexation of the sites is a logical addition to the City due to their location, on-site urban development, and availability of services. �. The proposed annexations will promote the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working in the vicinity of the annexation area. 3-7 Pacific Bell;A&R�Wreldir M .I Farm Supply Annexations LAFCo'Resoluti- _; ' , rter- L Fxyy ti. O 7' lxL ti tq Paye_ :hf " SECTION 2; Annexation•Area Described..The�&inexations'shall consist of'three ra g contiguous properties covering approximately '12 acres. 'hey are located on the north L N side`of}Suburban Road (196 Suburban Road), on the south side of Tank Farm Road;(205 Tank Fazm Road);,and .on the north side of Tank Farm Road (20.4 Tank Farm Road) "' They114 are,assigned Assessors Farcel Numbers of 076&.)K-033; 076i3-52'-032- and 076 35;PL041iespectively, as drown in the,annexation maps attached'as Exhibii B and legally" de_scribed iii_attached Exhibit C:_ SECTION 3' Council Recommendation; The City"Council.recommends`that the f.` t Local Agency`Formation Commission of San Luis Obispo County approve'the proposed annexations' ' Oct to property owners' compliance with City requirements regardmg'L'; ` public;improvements, in accordance with California Government Code Section 56844 et } SECTION 4 .Implementation The City Clerkshall forward a copy resol'ution.'and prez"oning actions; the mitigated Negative. Declarations of environmental impact,ti`andz`�all^pertinent supporting documents to the _Local Agency .Formation Commission. n a..,. mss"+ ., r ..ti + s�• IN otion of _; seconded by' ,°and ' ' , o on the follo�wmg Toll call vote., J AYES :14M)ES ,x ' ' _� f t ABSENT;t '. M,- the foregoing resolution was passed'and adopted thus day of ;.2000 .y .. .. � rw. .+0+-i>`n-r: .ti'!. �'). _cul .Y ¢;• .`. Mayor Allen Settle sl ATTEST r r , I. t ,�.7rrt .• � ':c¢� f J r t i 1 : e r Ci'ty:Clerk Lee:_P.rice` '°1��Y.. u. *�"• r .Yq: ' fir r j yrp � APP'ROV.ED.AS'TO FORM:: A., { Zi y w 1 -' tE' � 5 1 1.- orn J Jo nsen. =f,r..Y A,a.l ' ,'.,17 alb' + y',`1''s, � .. - n ..;�'}.:,-y'7u• ti:. . ter. .?'f+: - c•{r. �{ . �1 C-S c-s-S ` CS-SP M-SP Farre Supply PacBell Driveway m (Prezone C-S) (Prezone C-S) m R-2-S Gros 20 A&R Welding R-1 G-S (Prezone C-S) C S-S PacBell (Prezone M) R-1-PD caro - i_ GS : I City Limit Line Urban Reserve Line Airport Area Specific Plan Boundary 200 0 200 400 Feet Concurrently Proposed existlnc, ana pRopose6 d�-- Annexation Areas zoninc, 6esignatlons �®o Meters EXHIBIT A .•.�r� � R:. S� 4L'�� 'kik tt.:* IN. � r i'*_•.4g�yw t '� rf 11�' x � + d'r'�t�rcR 1p p� v' 8 - Ir I r^i� .d -'_. ca ! d �+( � J I n'�n,`.•yPL,,�r"� d°�� , ,. r J : e " !lj li I .w c ax ev w•rm•,®, ley ih°I .M '• -- �I � .rl x � .^ ,fr, ` ,f: r• �' ^4•�4-�r �e SFr t+•- e �.'�I s y (,N„e� d � � I � ^ M r t m�: x + < • -* �tle r!n n7m :3 tc :may iS If I_ t �;d1. e' II �Q '�., sr '..> '�e :,,• ipm fM1 rl�t'y�`,1.. .w l NN & .r '. .1� e +1 y .+a��s �I'r s,dar .0 O,y r . •,n iVj� d u A .,. mr sx. ✓' w L '•_�- e7 �"} d ', yi °Z u L�a• ate. &-. rAlt,e,,I d� v :�I.'i �•i'.. ,.;t d �r i�.. y Jn1i.�. ;it e� un t I w 10, ''" ' O �✓�°'C'i v 'm Sy "Ji�Rx3 li .b+iC, �'*..- r _ wV,.. >xi 4�T.i,��e y TC,�Zir�'Atf.T lr'-� I• a 1 I'."��`-'6{Ji �� 'P I _ p:0y-"" si,"ds.. ,rS'. vk `'A x. �,h . -r..• qF;:n I''1 E`,;rte Ping- iIt »'SZ£_ 3.. 155.68 X ¢ Ir n •x_7� 001 MOlVd. 3INVi— •• �- oe<� 'g� T-1 � f (+a) wsez, and'�Z;- "tL ALF Pte; J • 1 ]� ass ams ye, yJa—ggqa=>m ZF r�i A I i``i cr iJ n' Q44 r,L'g�<1Y + a 3 it X VEm a iT'Y. a �m �f ad<: I. a,. •.. 6jj �Zo,bw, r`�' ``/ s3 a I g g /`, immipl P e t nHob p fiEK£•''n _,,Zp rt >..• tr r b;- 3 ¢'` Yp �. . ; > l �h"( ;•!� � ° Egy$< a ekY:?`+x+x S¢II at III A 1 r� i :I. . f�rr ly.? •�,y, d P a� 'H "�r .. s e li ._Aq Ir �_ a �u .ryG.. . I -f +ii'/};� y, �, r y V� , '�f r, � :.r,o I F- � �•.r �. ri�-. 1� SYTI'eW5`� d=Sam Pm jo LLXP67 rr5.I a r' <w •� 'Mnx:� nW !Y' r� Y� �erc'i�� � 1. 5.�'.� ��' E 3'1 r r,�qf ' ^. •'oa o �I�li0e 'q' M ,• :"+.I '': ISM lv J,�'}. y wLI I_ IA i. S` �l�'= .. f. �' ". � `ts .k�. �y u"' �•n a¢moi� ria•@.,.. l^b ?I .��P �'CI Rr r. > . ry, ii kk�Ca es, pj`$ ry k,Hiil I, 7. J roaS31 Vln �.. � Vi� •"rinlb e/ry. Y'`Crc �/�Y.Y `'+'Yn}" ..` "+Ft'LI 'Y �r`5v - 1� Hua'o „ • .. 'e� r��r�1 YL �I ]_, Fj{f>��w ,{�y -' .i'•,Y'T Y�h �6"�'. OWCIN�IrYMAP CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ANNEXATION MAP 3 PARCEL I PARCEL 2 a / al 38 PM 32 CO 84-054 ss .NUN- irrrri / TANK( FARM ROAD S OII:b' `t\GOV :nr w vt ron v rorrc 1 / •Arr Quc-PA.m mar Arvaa rrtA a I �a avAuromr.n.e(•Ao.•+r�' .;11 1 I rlfL.•m: I I � a PV®on lm9mvC Orr Dvl AVOVVD Orr'"r CCNWR L. PR WD AMNLIARO.•RO ,Wr I '� E /Rr) -BOOt JL PAf!69 Or ur1RY0 SVRKr3 it / (Rrl-PARa4.r v CD-R.-m.. Je-ar-J] J I F 7 (I AILD~XAfL �I Nll O Y� �MV7,"r MAM) I 5 t 81 0. SIS 9110 �Ih ala 1 GRAPHIC SCALE 1 1 Ise-tl R I 1 ,t10,\uC SOPS YAP PRCPARCD rMD(R Jw SL•C#WRM Or.. I . 92� 1425 C Q I ,16®O M[L1P'p1tA IP.9-l0- ,p.u2e uC CID/RCS 9-JO-01 1 I 1 1 SUBURBAN ROAD �UnC/ho4.ai xsocwtes ���—— •v�.on..t,.a.rt[ t..urs asRa a um, lazD N•-m EXHIBIT B 2 w .v . Srl If. a r II$` E �: c DII fn df w N pix° "4� aS �nJ 'S.�✓ aafj f!. + Jf. l '• _..=T vial N.m yyam'.6 I°'.ME tt Rr^�:q Pp!V RS 72- 1 m d y' z 52 „r t 1 e. � � --i.siiourdLLeusni�u `L�•-�y1 _— . 3L. P¢ 1 1 Zrri _ aha P !p-12 1. tR.,cg°srym 'SCE _ 1' _ 500p530'E 66016' (R1) 1 16mts ii g _ r 912 M gad, — ,.:a�.,.p�A No-O i-Wow 6sO.iw (Rii. r w; C N7m ' 1 [ r Cf dam. if r te —IL IF— c ,; 7 PACIFIC BELL ANINE (ATION CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ANNEXATION Legal Description All that parcel of land in the County of San Luis Obispo,State of California described as follows: Beginning at a point on the existing city limit boundary at the northwest comer of Lot 6 as designated on that map entitled,"Map of the subdivision of Lots 24-26-31,the North half of Lots 18-23-30, and the South portion of Lot 17 of the Harford and Chapman Subdivision,in Township 31 South,Range 12 East,Mount Diablo Base and Meridian",being a map of that tract of land commonly referred to as the"Vachell Tract", filed at the request of A.H. &G.C. Vachell on February 6, 1893 in Book 1,at Page 4 of Licensed Surveys in the office of the Recorder for said county, thence, along the existing city limit boundary and the westerly line of said Lot 6, S 00°19'30"E, 1012.36 feet to the southwest comer thereof and the northwest comer of Lot 25,being the centerline of that 50.00 foot wide road(Suburban Road) as designated on said map of the Vachell Tract; thence, continue along the existing city limit boundary, along the west line of said Lot 25, southerly, 25.00 feet to the south line of said 50.00 foot wide road(Suburban Road); thence, leaving the existing city limit boundary, along the southerly line of said 50.00 foot wide road(Suburban Road),N 89°51'21"E,323.88 feet to the easterly line of Lot 25 as designated on said map of the Vachell Tract; thence, along the east line of said Lot 25,northerly,25.00 to the northeast comer of said Lot 25 and the southeast corner of Lot 6,being on the centerline of said 50.00 foot wide road(Suburban Road) as designated on said map of the Vachell Tract; thence, along the easterly line of said Lot 6,N 00°14'12"W, 537.23 feet, to the north east comer of that parcel of land conveyed to Pacific Telephone&Telegraph Company by Grant Deed filed as Doc. No. 51416,recorded October 31, 1978, filed in Volume 2110,Page 412 of official records, in the office of the Recorder for said county, thence, leaving the easterly line of said Lot 6, along the northerly boundary of said parcel of land conveyed to the Pacific Telephone &Telegraph Company, S 89°51'21"W,294.75 feet to a point that lies 30.00 feet easterly of the westerly line said Lot 6; thence,parallel with and 30.00 feet easterly of the westerly line of said Lot 6,N 00°19'30"W, 450.06 feet,to the north line of said Lot 6,being the southerly line of that 20.00 foot wide mad (Tank Farm Road)designated on that map entitled, "Map of the Subdivision of the San Luis Obispo Suburban Tract",Filed at the request of J.L. Beckett on February 7, 1907 in Book 1, at Page 92 of Licensed Surveys in the office of the Recorder for said county, EXHIBIT C 1 Page 1 of 2 3-13 3 wt i�'�L '�!�jJ`r ,�`gg{ � d ",,, L "•y3N �'^k ' 'i4 VIn r 41�' •'� �`� +r 1 t`JI Il+`� I y9r^'.aF���p4' d. � „M I *'('�y7r.',1{yl3x^'nA� ,f'4x j. -. '�'.L l y 5: �'}t 1 '-.^t!•'FG+ � �t6,�, x``(41 dr P } ,g. '4-atW.S',�r@?� ea. 'rt� .+�' r 1 � r +=f'`' 1n,'. t ' '"E .� s ,�,.•y`Yxis� � x+-,t'� '.+ i ��.� "-3• thence;along thabove descn—lied 19vcourm,N-00019x30 42.00 feet tothe northerly tioimdary of that stiip of land offered for dedication ar.•g':.1'YN-•e_ _ improvements dassignated according to Parcel°Map No.'C0-84-054,recorded OctoberA29, 1985, filed m:Book�3~8,Page 32 of Parce-1;JM s m the office of tha Recorder.for said counfy . •" _ r'4 'r-:nt�� � 'Y 1J m''w��w y�rt' ' ��. �. I,�'; Y�t'�+11�•f {�"i: *S ' Ily 'v i� rr�5J1 r' n Qk YA thence along said noith�erly boundary S 89W91151 W 30 00 feet toga point oa the"existing ciCV ty 11n11tib0llndatYtic ,t +"' r'S✓•r'�+ o� t',. ': t Ir •;p g, °ar.''✓G1F1: Yo�" _ ��a 'yt'hn ♦i4tc JIJ ':��,2 i1 qez YM,�L' thence, along existing city limit°boundary,S QQ'19'30".E,42 00 feet to.the,point of> eginning sf' T" ' ;� e15 �,,y �' "NIL­' 'w' tRpTy 3 cyte yt V-. r �a trnF�E_ ' •p.�tM �.7 "71'�tyt% 0.,(^. Filen 7! Contamin 4 /.total � ^ IT NI4 ry L cJ tx I d{ ?S li'r t �_ g .4 r s -b ] t. 7� •. 1 t r ,� H rt r',.: r9��':.4v.� 1 :r � •.. 'fF� r,lylz�7 +��' ab� 'fa b1:n y�'q4 +�R 1�;" ' ., f i�f'[Y 14ti r {i •.v, : rI aa•.-� �m�.� - �< � ! ?Y.'LJn rtpa �rfia L. ! t, ..[ - • _ d 1 Ott d 1 `F'4t z rz r. v, 1'-j J.IR.'..' R M _ c `.�' End'�Description �yz : ?$} r ,§:i. '7• Y ' P Y Y•� yy ' �'4� 9 Y I"i>f.F� bl rN q I Tor' +IhR YT JF,amu ° "•S,till `41'i' E It S r er .#!0' iS'Y ib J - a Prepared iby k , `j kManiel S..1 W&— Wp iLS 5139(expose 6/30/03) . ` r j a-n fe.J r�. b�x.Vl t-! 'I0._ �5 t�• ]f� ;f• 4��. .lar 1! l ars'q {♦ � '�.� �' �- �rrrzt=LI n� ]!.�_ + t f i- Sy+b .F�''S +� a YID ;.._ A u J';1� e44 Date:' 1 i ;,4yS-S `I F.I�]Lr l• Ir ' hN AF 1 I I` .•M,}Y t. ry p`. ( ..r �q rel • M { Y i tl I.--�.� Jx 00011MC&LdOC ,�-+ g".'* �! rY -!✓ i - �.. A^ {4 .y, �,. Y nj� A�f�i ��Jr jei-'. r�K Y v. �4[ C a... R �-u 3 la-2 'rS 1. � 1 � •' r• p 'a.r�.. �l1 � � .I"',,. �R .tn.iil iv."p� Q' 1 •��,,� '>? no ¢I �fs;J v. �` E^ "A-'rT�?° =�. yc y ;. ' � r )�+`� > a� > az — 2 � .. ydg',r ' t l .1 •. ..h� �jf t 2,l T r Z'a. , - ��"y'�4-�5-%i�'vlu^' .• t � n 1'a�l'rrL FT a'�-. �N I RJ` 14 r 1. 1����,p I 1 'k I�Ja{^ ry11 O Z t I'2t I •s y7'�: ri."t 1 p` 'f";ahj. `� k' 1'.,,„"} �4, t.•(iy"� a >�l v 1� J.t o :. '�. 14 ,•1 y T.r� y r : 0 ('11 t ,j r,/ J`-p=-y30. �. w `e 1 n G '}F.I�� 24.dt,J. `I-y XyW�$ y1) YY -"'4, .1'�', '.'' S t 1 x rfY( ON k v. +tr11i > '4 / a -.a .�,... y 9 +fi r'i •d r. iw �It jf �a$ 1 'S.t�- ��jt!" -r rNl')f4 #�Y,yid l n ' ''8-S� `S��c 1p I ! v-•'I' n4 yl St VM � `y - ,ryy x:ms Y Ii x I f Y Dr ' c I " 4� fly`(E x 1 1]JI�IC " IY t tiu�r �y - c v r, �,' "r '�'.hll�'y z 5 � ��! I y !a 7if•� 1}0 Wt W v I' `� '; Fs��.. 't;f , 1- � Ana s ?: .fa.o t '' � c��sr;�l� w �+w..�J: .F:' 4t�1�'��yA T�~��.�.5➢ T .Ti}.ti_(`. +? iv may$ J'i.� •,1 rt yi tYY 'Cp'.#� • tzW i� 'T. p C'�„rr 5x11,9- '°k�'Tr i- J y S .'die Ox Y1`•'a• y'1 i"1y yc i {II OW �"A�•drllY c ta• { nfi Yr?-t1y+'�`;"fr��y�pp{{11,��a�Sa X� ! T.�'ia }�fi5 n r 1Y1 1F� ''aYfr t� 1,rcS �rti Y' Iybl �•@�'Y s cc°.. s''i. a M a $'(• �`1T' o ar.l . 3”. a' h- •f U.OF , > yu h.P SJR.i.�}: to �a�a-6 i J�.• h'Fti � � ll��r+' ��'t- t 'S � � a'4..PP.'+S yc?7 r .y4 ro-'. '+.� 'y.. M1N1'1. ire "+J c 4 r i•> I Ifs '� � ri5. 3 tc ��E[1. -0i Y'r�^• �-.1 4f 1' a G' v` u� .W G t J� rl.. �tu'!n: Sn Y+� 1' .}t• �.� r5t17�dQ>.t ulf a'.o' 1 �t .`�1' a " ro.a I> 'r'F!3 v I ���y N•a 75 -i ♦1 St.'Fi >, I C {'F' .a 64�f ,7,fY fL.x �, ` AFI.�,'.,Tt11`d'>; �m, iy-t- AGF' >�a- * F;-ilf t'. .r°r i to •�, �j'. FEB.22.2000 8:19AM PULTS & ASSOCIATES NO.308 P.1/2 2-10-00 A&R WELDNG ANNEXATION ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land in Section10. Township 31 South, Range 12 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, said parcel being a portion of Lot 6 as shown on the map entitled "MAP of the Subdivision of Lots W 24-2631, North half of Lots W 18- 23-30 and the South portion of Lot W 17 of the Harford and Chapman Subdivision", and recorded in Book 1 of Record of Surveys at Page 4 in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and said parcel also being a porton of Tank Farm Road as shown on Parcel Map CO-84-054 as recorded in Book 38 of Parcel Maps at Page 32 in the Office of said County Recorder, and furthermore said parcel being more particularly described as follows:. COMMENCING at a point located within the existing boundary lines of the City of San Luis Obispo, said point being the intersection of the centerlines of Higuera Street and Tank Farm Road; THENCE along the centerline of said Tank Farm Road, North 89059'51" East, 1418.53 feet to a point on the existing boundary line of said City, said point also being the northwest comer of said Lot 6; THENCE along said City boundary line, South 00°19'30" East, 20.00 feet-to the northwest comer of that property described in the deed to Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company as recorded in Volume 2110, Page 412 of Official Records of said County; THENCE leaving said City boundary line, North 89059'51" East, 30.00 feet to a point on the west line of the subject parcel, said point also being the TRUE POINT Of BEGINNING; THENCE along said west line, South 00019'30" East, 430.06 feet to the southwest comer of said parcel; THENCE along the south line of said parcel, North 89°51'21" East, 294.75 feet to the southeast comer of said parcel, said southeast comer also being a point on the east line of said Lot 6; THENCE along said east line and a northerly prolongation thereof, North 00014'12" West, 491.33 feet to the northeast comer of said parcel, said northeast comer also being a point on the north line of said Tank Farm Road per said Parcel Map CO- 84-054; Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT C 2 3-15 FEB.22:2000 8 .19AM r r .2PUL`SS 8 41 .,s a s ;• NO 308, p, 2/2, x lkR u �,� Y"' igl#n .� ,. diYT.�tL ryA rda. Vu•% py ^t`� y _.�(L+��,. t� ^� ay,(��` ^j`��j J;�eS1 h��;� {i�• is P,° '� 54P� ' x P': ab•]i_ie i C a \. 9r' Y �tj e m� Jy'•_tr-.c, �.Y"' Yr r.�W i 1 ' r r [ y irS&t, '%kfOa,a. nRYa!'by,r7 ; ��^ ` r e b'� Zt1 '$ v 1 r'I :tt.':,"•,a,' ;, tLp ._, +rr\i .r I 3 :1 IT _ ��'• � T.a�yfl..p3��-t, 'ld,..�"F.�".4^I^"cv :+ - t.�i d' sL- _ i a rl !w'rf _''` n'r is y:.w F4 fiR�. r lAE� y 1VT- f h ✓,F ,r� r r 1 l''r a 3 r tA����� r3 3�.i•4,p•.6 Cr44�!>' y ��T^�•_ r3 P 9 l �r'_. r}.1r+�Tr t., 1r n }. Am ++'a kF' .}•t ' x F _."v'K"� vffiW, �.+,fdp,. t� t,,.. np- u (. a J�.G s°•p't�d#Sof �t 'c 4 r J �+,.}�F,� lir. .�wi}ya N s`U '..�" �,; d ,' �� ',��r � ,v, T1{ 't4ym..•��-���"n�'.. �=,h P'�h,.,���w Fr. �'•. � p,11 �.P . .fir a �� '� THENCE a ng the ngith line of said,parcel aSi tl said Tank Farm Road '6outh Q�'`, *�yh - :° r .� - - -4- J ,r THENCESoUffi 009: ast;19:30" E6ZO feet to.the TRUE,POfNT OF'BEGfNNING, -- hL,�. "d-^�w� ..�' � •"Y 4$,[`d.'�i,+y'�����`. 1. .R _ 1 h� .'� u 4Y' � '� e .� ar'"fi�. m • H a _ 1 1 _S�x' 'S`•1 r CONTAINING;` 3.33 _acres i5fiand;more or less, k y,;:u��&' �; r J � •,I ,r n'`y�^ *µr' l Tires d• w % '�S! .7 n''lw tiY.'ep'f. 'F �. •' ) •., fdY' h f r '* Mv��c� wt R y"xi + - t r7 �.L � , .1'! �, � •i � „n n ,r J 1yy. r _ 7 l� i���rs wahi ,} �C r��'k h S '�i'. ..�cH �( � lW' ,�a�",,l-q.�.t s�•. C� �•�i� , + .��r.. ,�- "L ANA1� ,� ^ ,, '�'- - `v'•'. ,:q "�� SI ` h'ri� '7,``\ '—�' Prepared b-W under theasupewision of', ; u ill �`nj y.r ��it :nre.• 7f. M 7 '� � �. �, a,F a rF 4�j. , ' �F .�,"`� �� tXH 9/30/ 1 %' '. — --- ,-• a t r1L J+jq NU 4428 Andrevu K. Holmes L.S. 4428 LIC:,Ezp.'9/30!01 •:.1 ey�v` C',, n n. 1 r. c..' � ., r r� i, ry '?k". d r•r}a„ aw^ �V r 7 r sTt cv.q,a 1# � .r. I�f•.:iN �n�t �{ .. Jr ,i. a d�@{: � ,� v °o . �z�y�MTr-a J r .� .�,. il:•o��Lr yt :V Itrr _ ��5 . 1 �."jx ) . � 2 '.- .'� � ham. rt xa Ifc -� 'c v J �w .::r• . � Z 4'a s T� ` .� M11 i>a .Q L `�'• n �t; a e I..S�'b:' d'F— rh 1•�ry4 k�ifJ•ay +. I wl4' ^ie� a{s.: ly '�•� t irl,,,,,' v y a..;J Sr+ �'/Ir. '' ST era `� -'�' r P 'rg r 'k. i � t :.,,• 5 � � r I• '� •cr 1 h ,n a' rr r<" y:•6 r' 9 y.NY.N.'I[,�tt `�Y;9 Y F L r,' r 9 5�4 �,'q [-ft �'At f �T' �'Ca {. "`I�y�1'rat}7 ,,y 'O 4 •)! q :e F'�vF} �. `r P'f�rw7`:t^k'!5 Q -r •7r y y r' , I/ti Jay, ^4'r4' �S'U^7 L�n 7;Y fl.I a,•f'n I '+ Dy, ,IP a ` ti r r a•: )9'1 to '`T"r >,i.+d't ;4 '' t ' fa^ , .4ay E 'l' 1 a' ."-!. ° Try ' � r r�)�c."r ,.i •� s �'. Rey ib('4 r v , , a�.,Y t'.' ' { EI Lr 1�4 •{p ..b "t -,ti '� r �{+'L '1 r 0.^ �`s k{ �+` a.]I 'U �iAi "� Y.ri- u � ^�r•F fes:�•�'f^ � �' ar•�;z'�'; � 'a��'NTd � +�.� ' �-{ � f-.rf°•Aa'�-r .'�'j i`ie Py��T,r�\ �r>I�d��ci�.�,:•�{•y X N 1 y.'7'�rv, ." 4.11,��{, a , �.. Gil. TMa�'yv/s,r ��rlT t �`tn ••fd�.�1'l�r'���ti C'A"�.Ei � � �'. � ^ r ,J 6 a. �'�'. + "') GJ I�:. £� r F ]�r x.r M1 If a V• J L. Y JA S S- c�-. wr• �G, .n r rf Ia iha' 1+rte # { t \ P. �'�. �� +r`7 ` .4a, �l 9 ? a t+•: 1P /� p -�i" t ��e'F? .tr'�ir� 4 ;a 44-. Y`J•�i�4{e'rl ,P�'riP+r,�•�\f$�`�`y JT 4 J.e'ah°�� +��r���?:}� �k•y i`� ���• F���+�=�' n� ' �OQ 12$ .. .e t 11 sTole�als/ahs'igannex�doc; w�� �,��;Y�;~� � ,� °. r ,r 3: '�:., n ��it'.I{ •�tt:;�Ir��,,•- A;:' ` �a 45 + _ e ,T' •4, `ti 1 D}C.- iu 1 tf x n 't 7{ t ik r4., .'r J�'�} s -,� �},dl—'�1 i� W+g•8�i^.tr'' q'�v dH ✓ 2�y'+!x'li.. R q- � v+� g ��w' . �A •J.Ik F^ °�- J ' YjF•r'L^ ,.°dV a .4 9 'F•.+ydw4.Cm , -- i, v,l. 1.t„> R„ o i' ';"Y' . sT � I N r l r ?.{I l p 2nyt. WA }�PJlft••;'h.�r+ '� ++'^. � r �.'7 '"', r >l,•. ��y�,e �a qJ -t 1,•` 9' r y vt ''C �' 'a'+ rW1 '�'I'�'yJ'rp.yb) �9r:W'm Y'� N" .�.YW �`�I ,y 1' a •r '.,' 3�r1n/V t 1� A i FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATION CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ANNEXATION Land Description All that parcel of land in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 6 as designated on that map entitled, "Map of the subdivision of Lots 24-26-31, the North half of Lots 18-23-30,and the South portion of Lot 17 of the Harford and Chapman Subdivision,in Township 31 South,Range 12 East,Mount Diablo Base and Meridian",being a map of that tract commonly referred to as the"Vachell Tract", filed at the request of A.H. &G.C. Vachell on February 6, 1863 in Book 1,Page 4 of Licensed Surveys in the office of the Recorder for said county,being a point on the existing boundary of the City of San Luis Obispo; thence, along the north line of said Lot 6,N 89156'53"E,259.54 feet to the southwest comer of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map CO-84-054, as filed in Book 38,Page 32 of Parcel Maps in the office of the Recorder for said county,being the True Point of Beginning; thence, along the southerly prolongation of the westerly boundary of said Parcel 2,S 00°05' 30"E, 20.00 feet to the south line of Tank Farm Road as shown on said Parcel Map CO-84-054; thence, along the south line of Tank Farm Road,N 89°56'53"E, 331.70 feet to a point of'intersection with the southerly prolongation of the easterly boundary of said Parcel 2; thence,leaving the southerly line of Tank Farm Road,N 00°08'50"W,20.00 to the southeast comer of said Parcel 2; thence,along the easterly line of said Parcel 2,N 00108'50"W, 660.28 feet to the northeast corner of said Parcel 2; thence, along the north Iine of said Parcel 2,S 89°56'53"W, 331.06 feet to the northwest comer of said Parcel 2; thence,along the west line of said Parcel 2, S 00° 05' 30"E,660.28 feet to the point of beginning. Containing: 5.2 total acres. End Description Prepared by: Daniel S.Hutchinson,LS 5139(expires 6/30/03) Date: EXHIBIT C 3 3-17 *� �v� I i¢ •y'd`T'rr{q'S I�:S� "f zi. •16 fir. Mr:vr• i, -t 9f g 1¢ i { ':J' , kr �' .+3n. ,�� Farb, t L � '�.yf •C-}�.N�S'�rL¢. .mow` r ,a1,'N.��s:�I(^L 1. r ' �a ]i� .. �. s 171,:7',�}..(Gr F�jl ,�'>�'�q«l ?yASa+J•+s��o I, G,�rg r��t`p'�4�{L��'�'1`"[,2'�j %'' vm r� .h Mak '�d,:I.., �.�'b.-s?K (•q�, Ir �"L�.tj�t �it�alA t d.�. + �J,eY 1 r ay.��i a,� ru9 CA,9r1'• r r-'.r i + r` SC-�T�`4Y'41,^yF.v� ' f , �'Fifi 1.4�e�J ,rz�� 5.1.k� •. 5 i �r(�s`9 ) � -n 11. aj� �Saa�S ��Y v v vti rl A\P�c� .tw• � I T 1'"} w �tSU'r�1 `� t vntl �'t - n, �� h .. 1 t j�•.•.r1FL M vJr F ro• Elavi.g- Y 9 Y�A •�-'k i"4r t:. J t r r a6^L�r!,,1 r, TJII i .� ! v>• 'Fa"-tea y�rMs 5L i i r�"+ c`�}+L`�Y^21'.:r J.y,k �,'.+'.,,�r1 . \ - 'Vr,�'y,,4i t 1 4 +, u''.� d1'�Y �n✓.i 'iL�j.^c ``�K » � �w i l ca33 7r, 1 f�Mt.ar 1� rr rytrr y•rF [y5r �wA+s+�;y\ r ,... »� ,Llyr l,' s.,✓�•.,.'e� r',7,✓<o d, w Z. 'rr 1 � .:aP vE Gf... ( ,�- : . I r r L 5 �Zr��1� �, �°�>'ix''P � L 0 5 A. 3 i 51•� -c:."G" r P d'`rti' [tCv-¢�.i}{{�ifljtY ]v.,l h -tel.r 1x V ti . v� 1u e-',._Ar rs, d w r' PourJ •r 19 ¢ r .-� L V dJJtr "1 Y � < L �'Yo +.., .S t _t* V+�Y �1'tS'.'���ya r•rt,'tAx4, nF�. '-Y �,1" •rt 4]'h�n•'r�d l�aF. y fir, I W �( T y t`r,�T✓ of 1 J 1`� t -T 'iT01ll\=-1 1 B¢`-AMy J '�Ar, I C .F si ti6� s }Wf " J `ti`I•'I W .W. x s.e`T�y' rU��y,. ��y����vk n.�;�L�k nt�\ta,�,r�>;+,#,��4r a -'"< L��„t r'.�f' 41 n I!�"'�.J°>u '�r .?fxlh R'•,-..I•i�� T � i'la. T 1""T ;.^•,�r ' qrq•• atYt A� ay � 1�•v • t .v� tl Vri''{t ] �I:f��t ��r nAF' Fi�al �'. i,? :.•r i' Fn '\ rP" . ]p'Yli c.:�� r •�: W L 4 }rt. N' t �. ... "f'r I r � t.Y ....J•t L-i p�`` ; .�' et 2 v.Ly r.w. + I I `eF':.o rul I,�T By,AL �' r l 5I' ° r ' Gni I . ., � ttvv-- � r w•\ a'F I�� ^'!ti L".t�� is (?9 1.-Y k'° '�i Ir � 4'1 rt+1��� s� yT77�� ae.. 1l•dL lry��'�' ' ti4. dnl+� r�i � '. r- N�a-.M.'�. -#" lr�+�'a ai! a� c •',' -� .=I .:F: ° � r ! vt°1" 7� ]OM1 1 .'.\ tjkvl 4`.s r -� r+. •f' � � t 1 +N r �M t 1.� $P�` 1' �rti: �d 'Se .t7� S 4Zr,�')y(jn.. ;y.Y'._r•-F-¢ � 'v i "rYS �. a a C ✓ ���'??7 � qty �._ ,ulef-f lET , ) P 1 �.�r r, �I n a ', •� a y al� ' M 4.(•.1�? + a Y d'L• •bd m'�d w �4q e�� fi-4:. .ls^)P' 6 r,,.h2 uYa ry ����• gat. o :e h �s YS' .1 l ( y. ° 1 '�"L ii� 7!Y ' F T'rr '-Y .,{'XIVyY L��3 au 1. ;{�°� 1L!yr�l'��y iv �lr� � 1�1 - �Ir h � � /��.. Y~ 4`�J ��•,ye,�l� ���jiEe�-fEr '4tl y A\ Y� 1... .h r ..yF t :^' YI�Jl IYh$y,�h .,p, lT'-L•}) 1.� yFr,''�M h'V 4 1'` I ,; ^y-)�• w'., �� .h+ F 9.' r�r � F fi I�,y,�y e l�' �{ 6 ��-+ r 2`S'�. ty �y5~Ina�r �� rF -^'E�1o'ri`ll��`F �-�� ;1F\ 1 � K� �jt I�• +1.}.�.% '�L @f.-� � U_ a l :t ��$g•��,s'I 4A 2 a fr .7.t"-.�'+ •^ 7._ c"� dd• -r 'd cp )_ 3 >•s,. IR u' Ji r rF �)`Jf�•+ `� � �; a 4 '�' ca� '^F F J /r ,,,f�s I c.F�%y, tip- ' L �eT L Mkr1 � `C 7,{�� r v ,a a c.•�wA'..t2�r¢J�wr � t' �F f'ry rF•k"9 r L. � '.+r r L,,-YIdj. �i,-L:i. 1• rl 64 b u�:S( W •r' r n r IMA s� - "-rdJcj;•t.,Yr a'(4 L J h 4 r i ,'y V. Si .r. % }y -e.I�I r ;k-� �7� "✓�,t o-¢C[ �I{YN�, 3 IF M $ a s A J!..EkM'ti Zw,. 1P- r 'h. rp,. N• +i fe>�4" Xi t 1 � "5 c✓ "° �' , �lr L W ! _ w L 4 lti•T 6 f 1�NM1 t ry,ry "fat `r +4'�` �r y ✓, E u�I Y's ..,w ry't�Tsc6o',,r�J ., '+6YT4Y �T �. y(` I {yo- �r`4y+ n ° �, .0 sYh ,�� .. k"i�i .'r Ta.l �.y�i.i'�F�••I ._qr1 r •"wr 5 LaM µj. r� t 7{: £ �,i. t^` ,yv.n4` ` ��.t=+"•ISl rd t r• t M1 , $4r I. yr,.F,'�Ja s _ t+ w +;�r et m- Y Y ✓v'Pk M1 `+�'t .{,N.F -Hs+ >`. �""-r n .{.. v Y�t,rt'.s.'IE�Yc1 >l � g (r" � �" ♦`� I `�j 'vr�'� ,rJ r I.- 'I _ '' •( 1 ! > .. T -. i t 4 1.tc ";7 ¢ f:KV c •r r �'4Aa•, 2 A•-^,)i'i T �i" .• � 2a. 11�J.'v y���.r�1 '3 f'C{'�/f 1+. I�,r �4�- L � i:` �v h. � 1 'A♦ �". ¢413 , 'F'yJ rl F L "tel r' A l LL JW f: r .4 I t +i :,n'+�'•Asy`Y .�--d.A�'�'�,R,•ly. li�'�' y�,��ty��r rMn,,n.p Y..¢�sryi, '���'�M?�.+rn rt .. P^ .r rW r`r•� � �li�}{ v.. t�e>�I �� � "ry S✓ 11(a t^T. !'�¢ �."`��l+ril-.'di..it t, s }I a.. , ' }- r(.Nr - f Ism `isu''SY^ T�) �,II,'i,.d i r if' l�.l T"�+� tf ti`if 3, 4 }0.�• 1 G.d y�V\ 4Lk e¢a r•(.i}'7 a I, e a... qt 4✓ti +na.r i hl e N %"Yah ,+:��'n S r1^s,��CY'tL g �r'b ' v r ({ f(yJ>r1 ,�°,�;.1,. R � s�°�r•1��,..e ) ,.;. Yt ,'.• (v N 7 •{��LIYt'y t it lam' ats +• moray !ICJ L 's �' k 9 '�'c Pv.t .�- ,a.. Gall•a r y� v. ,�L ,.r v b6 � � +.v �1Y r ar" [ph.µ-c n- i'r` �{(.,;� ) 1 t )-•'.f rlr �. f�" i+ yr v-a«Yn .3 r N L' r�� # "'T� [a ry r a r �Lv�'4`'� f' •�'14 i rk yam-' ,Y��F��! �.r.: �'1,. r ` ;� rrINS f^ ,b L{ ' ,,'Sr P r rr••CC n .•IhY 7 "���+ 1 1 ij r. ** t !h�,. i`W,4F'� -1L.�.L-f' R� r r A �`tE _'F 1,�ai�- ...✓'�E^ I I y� �1°Ty� C� i v r t i+l, pp JFS,,�cy70'`1 F•r �51•F�vn .�} e 1 t•A v d aC At ; N u'-}`.. 16�Y�•� 7a e i�L...rna4 r � tFIY •IY -�1 r 4 I fug f'h S 3� r LL t 'n��y.r} L I s ! Y}+`KF� r Fi�,s-,y� ;L. 1 Y f I[ P I•w ( � ,,yy�� QxM1 (('`i a d N l�(i� l^ ti� �.,^,,$��=��''``• 1,¢� �d,� �M �}' ! rlP. i� S'•fly t TN _ " v e�"�.°G�14�s��^'�2�..aa.++9S�a\'aL 6ield d�.�f„'F Z'IrL1'F IB�.,44�1f�Y" ✓t{°•x'q5.sn S vC �1�jrY 'l •-la FLYS aVi 137 al:{ j�L .,• .L��,,,r,1 ['r'•T ,E. 1_.CLY y pS'L.. 1 " gstk nl"•37Ygry�Iy- '" 3' ,r`Lie� '24�•••t'y i �� r. L ..y YJi" r* t ,,,, 5 a o5� I D• r. eim!'lyrr r ��,a' l'i�i J 8 '•,1�,,T¢�IWI;r$ �i �.L�,e � .J! s+.5AN rra�a�"'+ „lat r»a'c�ly'�"�`•F I'� .r'_V.'. It�-1Ir i i .tom 5 t"u iR. .1� Y ' -�5r, 5 wr.Yl �y`Tdw �'-1�.r4�,�nk,,,,�` ti..� yo-,�,p' -#n��n'rr1�'a.3 �' •` t�7,�-�.t` � ri iJl Yq ✓!n� C., f r¢' L�:. y�SbPlu" 9 rR4{{{ hL1! "^l to u 'F•71'} t`jtl>`iKftf�'r ��'].yt``�Y �i 4t �.I1r.L~¢��}L'`1 tt Y ^"'r 'A ra>_N 4- C`' -'I,a��, '.L"',LA�� rk:fl: 'y o ' 1 ,F,R>��'.j+,�Cs 'nr'�r .a�'YN( .v 4 �•>f -y -+"-,"a+'1 r _ +e" 1 :'"`H'YL�.-..'1� II b�j�.s'Al> FYI _ `�l2 i R` ^'"P� i.',✓1J., I'�j*�4��'Y h s`•. Yam �� i�,Y-rt Ff T"1511 a, 7• ^,rte !S'nc a b*`l c)' r •F, 9 I p J. 'a'ih,. ar1Lr � ''L 7A�. li`r r.14�...tt yrs.. . r ly.�'�"l r 1�� iw (P I• Pk �.a i �f. �, S r'i+k0.Xw � i [ ' RESOLUTION NO. (2000 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DENYING A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND PREZONING FOR PROPERTY AT 196 SUBURBAN ROAD AND 205 AND 204 TAN_ K_ FARM ROAD (ANNX/RIER 213-99, 188-99, and 206-99) PACIFIC BELL, A&R WELDING AND FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 26, 2000 and recommended: 1) prezoning the proposed annexation sites Service Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (M); and 2) forwarding a resolution to LAFCO requesting annexation approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on March 7, 2000 and has considered testimony of interested persons, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and evaluation and recommendations of staff, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of a request for annexation and for a prezoning the proposed annexation site to Service-Commercial (C- S) and Manufacturing (1Vl),makes the following finding(s): 1. Consideration of this annexation and prezoning request is premature and should not occur prior to completion of an Airport Area specific plan as required by adopted Land Use Element policies 1.13.3 and 7.3. (Council may insert different or additional findings.) SECTION 2. Denial. The request for approval of the prezoning described above is hereby denied. On motion of seconded by , and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of, 2000. Mayor Allen Settle 3-19 . 4 M b. L t ResoNti6pt-for,Wenial No. (MOO Senes) J, Pacific Bell,A&R Welding,and Fame aSu 7pp '%0 R. P4�06 2 - ATTEST. +li4c-.' T N. It 4 .4t!vzl'- k� City...GI&W.U&Tvn ekw K tot" I -D ;APPROVE A T" lt. Iflu. a City-Andth 46ff ji�ifgq4$en r Z'- i�F AY' Al 3g, A ov a 7:tl it 'mi 1 It 0 ":4 1 it ';4 11 -F "r. -:i"t I ,. -.T . f., 1. .- r Al - I . "p, --)� A Al e irL 41, ? a xt Z pt, X j- 18�it ,ovw� K'h�PA s! z. jl.- 14 X "to 'lc i n X MITIGATION AGREEMENT'S 3-21 Applicant Acceptance of Mitigation Measures Project: 213-99 196 Suburban Road This agreement is entered into by and between the City of San Luis Obispo and Papa ie-Beldon the Z l'T day of rEgfi e y 2000. The following measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Please sign the original and return it to the Community Development Department. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 2. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request 3. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to final annexation. 4. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted .to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 5. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shail be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. If the Community Development Director or hearing body determines that the above mitigation measures are ineffective or physically infeasible, he may add, delete or modify the mitigation to meet the intent of the original measures. Please note that section 15070 (b) (1) of the California Administrative Code requires the applicant to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is released for public review. This project will not be scheduled for public review and hearing until this signed original is returned to the Community Development Department. i Arnold B. Jonas ickie L. Berry Community Development Director Director, Corpora a Re Estate Transactions Pacific Bell Telepho Comp tnys 1. Pacific Bell Telephone Company Applicant Acceptance of Mitigation Measures Project: 188-99 205 Tank Farm Road This agreement is entered into,jay and between the City of San Luis Obispo and David Erbstoesser on the 1AA day of ?aw,"t/ , 2000. The following measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts. Please sign the original and return it to the Community Development Department. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to final annexation. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. 4. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 5. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. 6. New buildings constructed on this site shall incorporate the following as feasible: • skylights to maximize natural day lighting; • operable windows to maximize natural ventilation; and • energy-efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shall document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. 7. 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; and • extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. 3-23 t t : ER,206=99 MitigationGAgree_ment �r !Pgeta 1. a rc . If the Commurnty Development Director or hearing body determines that the 966"ve mitigation measures are ineffective of physically in`feasitile,.he may add, delete or modify the mitigation-to i meet th�eintent of the original measures: Please,note `that section 15070 (b) (1) of the California Administrative Code requiFes the ti applicant to,agreeto the above mitigation measuVes before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is' released'for public review. This project will - e scheduled for public }r'. reidiWind;hearing until this signed iginal`is returned to fie'C mmunity Development Department . OM1. •+�. �, _ -- ....., Amold B,Jonas• Jim BrG n a epk, eral:Manager for _ Cormm`unity Development Director Farm Sup .ly Company " M1 17 i .1. '-' 1. - • c - r Y =24 Applicant Acceptance of Mitigation Measures Project: 206-98 204 Tank Farm Road This agreement is entered into by and between the City of San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo County Farm Supply Company, dba Farm Supply Company on the 11 7# day of _6 , 2000. The following measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adver a environmental impacts. Please sign the original and return it to the Community Development Department. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to building or grading permit issuance. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. 4. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 5. Future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on- site recycling. 6. New buildings constructed on this site shall incorporate the following as feasible: • Skylights to maximize natural day lighting; • Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation; and • Energy-efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shall document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. 7. 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, and • Extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. 3-25 18899 _ ER .* Mitigatidh x1greement y : t. . Page;2 y If the Cgmrnumty Developrtient Director or hearing body determines that the above mitigation ,: : _ - _ - measures-are,ineffedtiye or physically infeasible he,may add; delete or modify the mitigation to meet the:vntentof the original measuFes: Please .mote: that section 15070 (b) (1) of the California Administrative Code regui`res the applicant,to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated Negative peclaration is releasee! for Pybllc review. This project will not be scheddied for public review'and ,hearing, until this signed original is returned to the community Development Departriient:, ` Arnold B. Jonas bD'yid E_rbstoesser Commny DeVelop - -nt DirectorA &,R Welding y P! M1 Lr" II 3-26 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 3-27 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO �il1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM#"l,�_ f,,"' BY: Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner MEETING DATE: January 26, 2000 FROM: Ron Whisenand, Development Review Manager FILE.NUMBERS: Annx, R, ER 188-99, 206=99, and 213-99 PROJECT ADDRESSES: 196 Suburban Road and 204 and 205Tank Farm Road SUBJECT: Consideration of a request to annex and prezone three contiguous sites with a total area of roughly 12 acres east of the Spice Hunter Annexation along Tank Farm and Suburban Roads. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Recommend that City Council: 1. Pass to print an ordinance adopting the mitigated negative declarations of environmental impact (ER 188-99, 206-99, and 213-99) and prezoning the annexation areas Service Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (M). 2. Adopt a resolution recommending that LAFCo approve the annexations. BACKGROUND Situation These applications are being made pursuant to the City's Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy. The San.Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) authorizes annexation. The applicants are in the process of filing applications to LAFCo. City and LAFCo policies require that the Planning Commission and City Council determine the appropriate zoning (referred to as "prezoning")for the sites to be annexed. Because the three sites are contiguous,the staff report addresses all three applications. Data Summary Applicants:. Don Erbstoesser, A&R Welding (205 Tank Farm Road) Jill Viggiano, Pacific Bell (196 Suburban Road) Jim Brabeck, Farm Supply Company (204 Tank Farm Road) Property Owners: Thomas, David, and Timothy Erbstoesser (205 Tank Farm Road) Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, Inc. (196 Suburban Road) Unocal Corporation (204 Tank Farm Road) Representatives: Kim Hatch, Pults and Associates (A&R Welding) Jill Viggiano, Real Property Manager, Pacific Bell Patti Whelen, Cannon and Associates (Farm Supply) County Zoning: Commercial-Service City General Plan- Services and Manufacturing 3-28 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188, 206, 213 -99 Page 2 Environmental Status: The Director determined the projects required a mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact on January 19, 2000. Project Action Deadline: Legislative projects are not subject to permit streamlining. Site Descriptions Pacific Bell: The 4.3 acre Pacific Bell site is currently developed with a.utility corporation yard and engineering and administrative offices. It is a flag shaped lot with a driveway extending to Tank Farm Road between the Spice Hunter and the. A&R Welding properties. Frontage improvements have been installed along Suburban and Tank Farm Roads. A&R Welding: The 2.9 acre A&R Welding site, immediately to the north of the Pacific Bell site, is partially developed with gas distributor business that occupies two buildings and a storage yard. Roughly 1.76 acres of the site is undeveloped. Frontage improvements are installed along the developed portion of the site on Tank Farm Road. Farm Supply: The 4.7 acre Farm Supply site, across Tank Farm Road to the northeast of A&R Welding, is vacant and has been used for farming. There are no frontage improvements. All three sites are relatively flat. Surrounding land uses include agriculture and other service-commercial and manufacturing operations. Please refer to the site locations map prepared by Cannon and Associates. Development Plans Future development will require possible land use permits and architectural review in accordance with City standards and guidelines. A development plan has been submitted with the annexation requests. Pacific Bell: No further development is proposed at this time. This annexation is being requested in part to enable annexation of the A&R Welding and Farm Supply sites since the Pacific Bell property at 196 Suburban Road is the only one of the three proposed annexation areas immediately adjacent to the city limits. The applicant also wishes to connect to City water and sewer service. A&R Welding: The applicant is proposing to develop the vacant portion of the site with a 23,000 square foot commercial building. Farm Supply: Farm Supply wishes to relocate its business to this site. The development plan submitted shows a proposal for 32,000 square feet of building area for office, retail and storage uses and an outdoor plant nursery. 3-29 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport.Area Annexations:Annx,R,ER 188, 206,213 -99 Page 3 EVALUATION General Plan/Interim Airport Annexation Policy Conformance Ultimately these sites are envisioned by both City and County land use plans to be annexed to the City. It is the policy of City Council to process interim annexations of those properties in the airport area which will otherwise develop in the short term within the County (LUE Policies 1.13.3 and 7.3). The interim annexation criteria allows property to be considered for annexation prior to the adoption of the Airport Area Specific Plan provided: 1. It is contiguous to existing city limits; and 2. It is within the City's urban reserve line; and 3. It is near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the applicant's property accompanies the application for annexation. 6. The applicant(s) agree to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area=wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost sharing plan maintained by the City. In this case, the properties meet all of the above General Plan criteria for early annexation. The City Engineer has certified that adequate resources exist to serve the sites upon annexation, subject to compliance with City water and sewer regulations. Utilities and services are available in Tank Farm and Suburban Roads and will be extended along both Tank Farm and Suburban Roads across the full frontage of these sites. The properties are within the urban reserve line. The Pacific Bell site is immediately to the east of the city limits line. The A&R Welding site is immediately to the east and north of the Pacific Bell site. The Farm Supply site is across Tank Farm Road to the northeast of the A&R Welding site. The annexation area would include these three sites together with the full width of the Tank Farm and Suburban Road rights-of-way fronting the properties. Annexation of these properties would result in a logical extension of the present City limits boundary consistent with applicable policies of the General Plan and the City's Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy. The applicants have agreed to contribute to the cost of preparing the Airport Area Specific Plan, sharing the cost of constructing area-wide infrastructure improvements, and contributing to open space preservation according to the provisions of the Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy. Costs have been calculated as follows: 1. Utilities - The applicants will tie into the City system for fire protection and development purposes. Water and sewer impact fees and sewer lift station fees will be required prior to connection to water and sewer services, typically upon development. All applicants will also have to develop a water allocation (through retrofitting) prior to connection to water services. Pacific Bell will extend the water and sewer mains along Suburban Road to the easternmost limit 3-30 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188,206,213 - 99 Page 4 of its property. A&R Welding and Farm Supply will extend water and sewer mains in Tank Farm Road to the easternmost limit of their properties. 2. Transportation Impact Fees — All new development is subject to transportation impact fees based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 3. Open Space Fee - The City's General Plan requires development in the airport area to contribute to the acquisition of open space. The interim policy establishes a fee of$2,500 per undeveloped acre due immediately upon annexation approval by City Council. Since the property at 196 Suburban Road is essentially developed, this fee would not apply to the Pacific Bell Annexation. Based on the 1.76 acres of undeveloped area at 205 Tank Farm Road, the A&R Welding Annexation would be subject to an open space fee of $4,400 upon Council approval of the annexation. The 4.7 acre vacant Farm Supply property would be subject to an open space fee of $11,750. 4. Deferred Area-Wide Impact Fee - This fee represents the undeveloped portion of the property's share of the cost of area-wide infrastructure for the buildout of the entire airport area, such as major roads, trunk water and sewer improvements, storm drain improvements, and preparation of the Airport Area Specific Plan. These fees are in addition to the utility and transportation fees discussed above. The City's Interim Airport Area Annexation Financing Plan establishes a fee of $15,538 per undeveloped acre, due prior to Council action on the annexation. Since the property at 196 Suburban Road is essentially developed, this fee would not apply to the Pacific Bell Annexation. Fees to be paid or secured by A&R Welding would total $27,347 (1.76 X.$15,538). Fees to be paid or secured by Farm Supply would be $73,029 (4.7 X $15,538). These costs and other development issues will be addressed in a formal pre-annexation agreement to be executed prior to action on the annexation by the City Council. PrezoningJLand Use Part of the annexation process involves specifying an appropriate City zoning designation for the site upon annexation. The City's General Plan Land Use Element applies a designation of "Services and Manufacturing" to these sites. To be consistent with this land use designation, the sites must be zoned either "Service-Commercial' (C-S) or"Manufacturing" (M). Consistency with general plan polices and zoning regulations is best achieved by prezoning the Pacific Bell .property at 196 Suburban Road "Manufacturing" and prezoning the A&R and Farm Supply properties at 205 and 204 Tank Farm Road "Commercial Service." Technically, the driveway portion of the Pacific Bell site which extends up to Tank Farm.Road would also be zoned "Commercial Service." 3-31 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188, 206,213 -99 Page 5 The Draft Airport Area Specific Plan, which is nearing completion, suggests properties in this area along Suburban Road should be zoned "Manufacturing" and properties along Tank Farm Road should be - zoned "Service Commercial." A&R Welding and Farm Supply: The applicants are requesting "Service-Commercial" zoning consistent with the described purpose and application of the C-S zone as described in the zoning regulations: The C-S zone is intended to provide for storage, transportation and wholesaling as well as certain retail sales and business services which may be less appropriate in the City's other commercial zones. It will be applied to areas designated services and manufacturing on the general plan map, typically those areas with more public exposure along arterial streets than places reserved for manufacturing. Tank Farm Road is shown on Figure 2 in the Circulation Element as a parkway arterial. The existing and planned uses of the properties will be consistent with the purposes of the C-S zoning district. Some of the planned uses may involve use permits by either the Administrative Hearing Officer or the Planning Commission. All new development will be subject to architectural review. Pacific Bell: The applicant is requesting a zoning designation that will accommodate their current use — Utility company corporation yard and engineering and administrative offices. The Draft Airport Area Specific Plan being prepared by staff shows this property and remaining properties in the Airport Area along Suburban Road as most suitable for a "Manufacturing" designation. The specific plan, as drafted, would allow a corporation yard and would allow administrative and engineering offices subject to an administrative use permit. Utility company corporation yards are also allowed by the current City zoning matrix. Therefore, staff recommends the property at 196 Suburban Road be prezoned "Manufacturing." Prezoning the Pacific Bell site "Manufacturing" is consistent with the application of the "Manufacturing" zone as described in the zoning regulations, which states the zoning will be applied to areas designated "service and manufacturing" on the general plan map, usually those served by, but with no frontage on, arterial streets. Suburban Road is shown in Figure 2 of the Circulation Element as a local street. Open Space Land Use Element (LUE) policies require that annexation and development of properties in the airport area include provisions to help protect open space in the greenbelt near the airport area. The applicants have two alternatives in meeting these policy requirements: payment of in-lieu fees or dedicating an open space easement or fee ownership for land in the southern part of the City's greenbelt. LUE Policy 7.4 Greenbelt Protection Annexation of the Airport Area, whether it occurs as one action or several, shall be 3-32 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188, 206,213 -99 Page 6 consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area annexation shall not take effect unless the annexed area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land-conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. In this case, the applicants are choosing the option to pay fees in-lieu of dedication. This is the logical choice in this case since the sites and the surrounding area are either developed or planned to be developed with urban uses. The above described pre-annexation agreement will ensure payment of the fee consistent with General Plan policies. Water Supply The Utilities Department has reviewed these annexation applications and determined that they are consistent with the Water Management Element and that there is sufficient water available to serve site development. The City of San Luis Obispo obtains its water from a combination of surface and groundwater sources. Adopted safe annual yield from these sources is 7,735 acre-feet per year. The City is pursuing the development of additional water supplies, including the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project, and the Water Reuse Project. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable needs, such as landscape watering, will reduce demand on potable water supplies. This is likely to be the first additional source developed and is projected to yield roughly 1200 acre-feet per year. Half that amount would be held in reserve. The other half would be used in place of potable water, thereby increasing the amount of potable water available for allocation by roughly 600 acre feet per year. Planning for water use in the City is based on an average consumption of 145 gallons per day per person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption during and since the most recent drought. Based on this water use rate and current city population, present demand is 6,962 acre-feet per year. This number is recalculated annually using updated population estimates from the California Department of Finance. The difference between safe annual yield and present demand is 773 acre-feet per year, which is available to serve new development. Half this amount (386 acre-feet) is available for development in annexation areas. Until retrofit of the entire city is essentially complete, all developers are subject to the City's Water Allocation regulations and must retrofit existing facilities with low-flow plumbing fixtures in order to offset twice the expected demand of their development prior to issuance of a building permit. The 3-33 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188,206,213 -99 Page 7 Utilities Department staff estimates that remaining opportunities for retrofitting could reduce current water use by 500 acre-feet per year. The estimated water demand for all three projects is very low — less than 5 acre-feet per year. Compliance with Water Allocation regulations will ensure water supply availability. If the applicants choose to use well water for landscape irrigation, demand for city water to serve these sites would be further reduced. Environmental Impacts The attached environmental initial study concludes that annexations and proposed site development will not result in any significant adverse impacts on the physical environment. Preliminary review of conceptual development plans by various City departments indicates that such development could be accommodated by City services. The primary environmental issue with each of the annexations is related to soil contamination as a result of the Unocal pipeline leaks in Tank Farm Road. Recommended mitigation would require preparation of a site specific health and safety plan prior to issuance of any building or grading permits. Mitigation is also recommended to reduce cumulative impacts on air quality, energy conservation, and the solid waste stream. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend that the City Council forward a recommendation to LAFCo to deny the requested annexation based on appropriate findings. 2. Continue action with direction. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Other department comments are attached to the environmental initial study and support annexation. RECOMMENDATION Forward a recommendation to City Council as outlined at the beginning of this report based on the following findings: Environmental Review Finding: 1. The environmental initial studies (ER 188-99, 206-99, and 213-99) adequately evaluate potential adverse impacts to the environment as a result of the proposed annexations and prezonings. Furthermore, based on information in the applications, a field inspection, and a review of 3-34 Planning Commision Meeting 1/26/00 Airport Area Annexations: Annx,R,ER 188, 206, 213 -99 Page 8 relevant references in the Community Development Department, staff has determined that there is no evidence that the projects will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Prezoning Findings: 1. Prezoning the annexation area at 204 and 205 Tank Farm Road Service Commercial (C-S) and prezoning the annexation area at 196 Suburban Road is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Services and Manufacturing; 2. Prezoning the annexation areas Service Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (M) is consistent with the intended uses and locations of C-S and M zoned properties as described in the zoning regulations; 3. A prezoning of Service Commercial and Manufacturing is appropriate at the proposed locations and will be compatible with surrounding land uses which are primarily service commercial, manufacturing, and agricultural in nature; and 4. The prezoning will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Attached: Annexation/Prezoning.Maps Environmental Initial Studies with project specific attachments 3-35 Ul SOCIAL SECURITY M OFFICE ■ Q VP San alas C o r: „ _ :I dp S .a La Val -j 01 Roan � (w,.) 0 Prado Road .. San I 0 ` Ui Bonetti Dr. BORDERo ■ Mobile/ Park a~W Granada E)r ve cn C / s 67 ° — _ Meissner arse ..Cook >° Hind_ Ln. Business i Park - r Farm CID Supply Site S Margo a - �: ' I Tank Farm Road s s �r j yShort St. Prad-eras y•= FF A&R Welding N eF huparrosa Dr. O V Cn Site Verdesy °Sub rban Road � pacBell O Los m o J s Oso t alleyCt t N o o (9HTESSORI 2 HLLDREN'S SCHOOL L to 1 m Not to Scar-- s f Existing San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of: ■ ■ ■ ■ A&R Welding, Farm Supply, Concurrently-Proposed Annexation Areas and PacBell ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• To: City of San Luis Obispo CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED ©a1On Site Locations ANNEXATION AREAS ASSOCIATES 9801151 Exftifs.m65-II W - 3-36 PACIFIC BELL ANNEXATION ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY ER 213-99 3-37 Il�lllll III city of sAn hugs oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ER 2.13-99 1 . Project Title: Pacific Bell Annexation, Annx / R / ER 213-99 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: Associate Planner Whitney Mcllvaine, 781-7164 4. Project Location: 196 Suburban Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Jill Viggiano, Pacific Bell, 2600 Camino Ramon, Room 1 N0501, San Ramon, CA 94583 6. . General Plan Designation: Services and Manufacturing 7. Current County Zoning: Commercial Service 8. Description of the Project: The applicant is requesting annexation of roughly 4.3 acres of property between Tank Farm and Suburban Roads. The area to be annexed is developed with administrative offices and a corporation yard for Pacific Bell. No additional site development is proposed at this time. 9.. Entitlements Requested: Annexation and Prezoning 10. Surrounding Land Uses: Agriculture and other service-commercial and manufacturing operations. 11 . Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Local Agency Formation Commission /rtO, TheeleCity of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activitl a38 vy Tcommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 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. X Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems X Hazards Recreation Water Noise X Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation Systems F—x1 � There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. F-1 The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an X attached sheets have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project May have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (11 .has been adequately analyzed in an. earlier document pursuant to applicable legal 2 3-39 standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. January 27, 2000 ignatur Date Ronald Whisenand, Development Review Manager Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. Printed Name For 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 the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 3 3-40 .Issues and Supporting Informat, sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues unless Impact mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1,2, x 6, b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies 5, 8, x adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? 13 c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 1,2 x d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact 1,10 x to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an x established community (including a low-income or minority community)? Zoning The City's general plan applies a designation of Services and Manufacturing to this site. To be consistent with this land use designation the site must be zoned either Service-Commercial (C-S) or Manufacturing (M). Zoning regulations state that Commercial Service zoning should be located along arterials and that Sites zoned Manufacturing need not be on arterials. Tank Farm Road is an arterial. Suburban Road is a local street. The draft Airport Area Specific Plan indicates that Manufacturing would be the most appropriate zoning for the bulk of the site. The driveway extends into an area where C-S zoning is recommended. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Consistency with general plan polices and zoning regulations is best achieved by prezoning the subject property (M), Manufacturing with the driveway zoned Service-Commercial (C-S). Agricultural Compatibility CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation of an already developed site will have no impact on nearby agricultural operations. Airport Compatibility On the City general plan land use map and in Figure 9 (Airport Area map) of the Land Use Element, the site is included within the boundaries of the Airport Area. The project site is located in Airport Land Use Area 3 as shown in the Airport Land Use Plan. The existing administrative offices are a conditionally approvable use in Airport Land Use Area 3 and the corporation yard is designated as compatible. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) approved the proposed annexation on January 19, 2000 with recommended conditions for future site development. Any future development of the project site will be subject to conditions of approval recommended by the Airport Land Use Commission. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation will not impact airport operations. Site development will be subject to ALUC conditions of approval. Land Use Element Policies Ultimately this site is envisioned by both City and County land use plans to be annexed to the City. It is the policy of City Council to process interim annexations in the airport area while simultaneously working toward the goal of preparing a specific plan for this area. Governing Policies: 4 3-41 Issues and Supporting Informat,. Sources Sources Potent. Potentially1xssThan No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated • 7.2 Airport Land Use Plan Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The project does not include development at this time. Future site development is subject to review by the Airport Land Use Commission. • 7.4 Greenbelt Protection Annexation of the Airport Area, whether it occurs as one. action or several, shall be consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area annexation shall not take effect unless the annexed area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land- conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. This policy applies only to undeveloped acreage. While portions of this site could be redeveloped in the future, it is fully utilized at this time and no further site development is proposed with this annexation. 7.5 Internal Open Space The areas designated for urban uses, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as site amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Open Space Element. In addition, wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. CONCLUSION: Not significant. This site is not identified in the Open Space Element as having resources which must be protected. 7.6 Development Before Annexation A. Areas which are designated for eventual urban development may be developed during the interim with rural residential or rural commercial uses. In such areas, County development standards and discretionary review should assure that projects will not preclude options for future urban development consistent with the City's planning policies and standards. Before any discretionary County land-use or land-division approval for such areas, a development plan for the site should be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainage proposals will be compatible with future annexation and urban development. B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation should comply with City standards for roadway cross-sections, bus stops, walking and bicycle paths, landscaping, view protection, setbacks, preferred site layouts, and architectural character. CONCLUSION: Not significant. This site was developed in 1980. No further site development is proposed at this time. 5 3-42 Issues and Supporting Informatt- . Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less Than No Signiftcant Significant Significant Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues mitigaesstion Impact mitigation Incorporated ♦ 7.7 Transit Service Transit service linking development sites with the citywide bus system should be provided concurrent with any additional urban development in the.Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The need for additional transit facilities will be reviewed in conjunction with new development on this site or other new development in the vicinity. ♦ 7.8 Specific Plan The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainage within the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The City Council has directed the preparation of a specific plan for the Airport Area. Because this site is fully developed, it will not be assessed an interim annexation fee for specific plan preparation and infrastructure construction. ♦ 7.14 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. li it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. See discussion under policies 7.4 and 7.5. ♦ 1.13 Annexation and Services ♦ 1.13.1 Water & Sewer Service The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections or contracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity-flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity-flow or pumps in the City sewer system. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation into the City will ensure compliance with this policy. In addition, the property is located inside the City's urban reserve line. See water supply discussion under Utilities below. ♦ 1.13.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing Annexation should be used as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which are to be developed with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. The City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas which are to remain 6 3-43 Issues and Supporting Informat,, .Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less ThanNo Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues UNess Impact mitigation Incorporated permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city-approved specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflect topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed land uses and roads. Annexation of this site is requested in part to enable two other sites (204 and 205 Tank Farm Road) to annex to the city. Topography poses no issue since all three sites are essentially flat. Needed capital facilities and funding are outlined in the attached letter from the Community Development Director to the applicant. This site is developed, and therefore not subject to interim annexation fees. The pre-annexation agreement states that property owners and their successors will agree to support formation of an assessment district if that is the approach adopted by the City for funding the specific plan and infrastructure improvements. Frontage improvements are in place. The property owner wishes to connect to the City's sewer and water service and abandoned the on-site well and septic system. The existing land use, a utility corporation yard, is consistent with the general plan land use designation of Services and Manufacturing. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Urban development and annexation of this site are envisioned in both City and County land use plans. ♦ 1.13.3 Required Plans Land in any of the following annexation areas may be developed only after the City has adopted a plan for land uses, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing of public facilities for the area. The plan shall provide for open space protection consistent with policy 1.13.5. A. For the Airport area, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area. Until a specific plan is adopted, properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application for annexation; and 6. The applicant agrees to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area- wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost-sharing plan maintained by the City. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. A specific plan for the Airport Area is not yet complete. The applicant's request is consistent with the interim annexation criteria listed above. The applicant's compliance with the interim plan will be guaranteed through a formal written agreement between the applicant and the City. ♦ 1.13.4 Development and Services Actual development in an annexed area may be approved only when adequate City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the level of services or increasing the cost of services for existing development and for build-out within the City limits as of July 1994,in accordance with the City's water management policies. The water management policies may allow part of the water retrofit credit that would be needed for build-out within the 1994 city limits to be used for annexation projects. Water for development in an annexed area may be made available by any one or any combination of the following: A. City water supply, including reclaimed water; B. Reducinq usaqe of City water in existinq development so that there will be no net increase in long- 7 3-44 Issues and Supporting Informat, 6ources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated term water usage; C. Private well water, but only as an interim source, pending availability of an approved addition to City water sources, and when it is demonstrated that use of the well water will not diminish the City's municipal groundwater supply. The applicant plans to extend city water and sewer lines and connect to these city services. To connect to city water, the applicant must develop a water allocation, consistent with the City's Water Allocation Regulations, which require applicants to retrofit existing plumbing fixtures throughout the city to save twice as much water as the project is anticipated to use. The existing well on site could continue in use for landscaping irrigation. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Connection to city water and any future site development under the jurisdiction of the City will be subject to the City's water allocation regulations. See water supply discussion under Utilities below. ♦ 1.13.5 Open Space ♦ Each annexation shall help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open Space, and for the habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that are identified in policy 6.1.1. Policies concerning prime agricultural land shall apply when appropriate. The following standards shall apply to the indicated areas: D. Airport Area properties shall secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's southerly urban reserve line. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Site specific resources identified in the Open Space Element are the Unocal wetlands, which do not extend onto the project site. Since no further site development is proposed at this time, open space protection is not required with annexation of this property. ♦ 1.14 Costs of Growth ♦ The costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City will adopt a development-fee program and other appropriate financing measures, so that new development pays its share of the costs of new services and facilities needed to serve it. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Site development is not proposed as part of this annexation application. Anticipated infrastructure needs and fees for future development are outlined in comments from the City's Public Works Department. ♦ 1.15 Sofid Waste Capacity In addition to other requirements for adequate resources and services prior to development, the City must determine that adequate solid waste disposal capacity will be available before granting any discretionary land use approval which would increase solid waste generation. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. Solid waste from this site is delivered to Cold Canyon landfill, which 8 3-45 Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources Sources Potent, _ Potentially !Jess Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated currently has a capacity to accept solid waste for approximately 18.5 years, based on the current rate of disposal and ongoing trends showing a reduction in per capita waste generation. Although annexation of this already developed site will not increase the solid waste stream, measures to reduce solid waste are still needed to improve compliance with the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per person per year. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity in the year 2018. The act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. As of 1998 (the date for which latest figures are available), San Luis Obispo had reduced its waste stream by 34%. To help reduce the ongoing waste stream, the current operation should include facilities for both interior and exterior recycling. to reduce the unrecycled waste stream generated by the project consistent with the Source Reduction and Recycling Element. To help reduce waste generated by any future site development, a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded demolition and construction materials should be submitted with the building permit application. Mitigation Measures: Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population 1 x projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or x indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable x housing? The Land Use Element (LUE) growth management provisions (section 1.0 of the LUE) call for limitations on the number of residences that may be built every year, to maintain an average growth rate of one percent per year during the 1990s. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will not impact population. Job creation is not an issue in this case since the site is already developed. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? 11 x b) Seismic ground shaking? 1 x c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 x d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? x e) Landslides or mudflows? 1 x 9 3-46 Issues-and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil 1 x conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? 9 x h) Expansive soils? 9 x i) Unique geologic or physical features? 10 x There are no known faults on site or in the immediate vicinity. The site is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California, and strong ground shaking should be expected during the life of on-site structures. Any structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the Uniform Building Code. Soils Engineering Reports prepared for the properties in this vicinity - the adjacent A&R Welding site in particular - indicate no likelihood of liquefaction or subsidence, but also note that expansive soils are present in this area. The site is essentially flat with no unique geologic or physical features. A soils engineering report specific to this site will be required with any application for site development. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. No site development is proposed at this time and there are no known geological or soils conditions that would make this site unsuitable for development. 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the 1 x rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards x such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of x surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water x body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water x movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through x direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception 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-ib groundwater quality? x i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater x otherwise available for public water supplies? CONCLUSION: Not significant. The site is almost completely covered by impervious surfacing. Connection to the city water system would reduce or eliminate well water usage at the site. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an x existing or projected air quality violation (Compliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines)? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants x c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause x any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? x CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation and prezoning pose no threat to air quality. 10 3-47 Issues and Supporting Informatt. . Sources Sources PotentiPotentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? x b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp x curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment))? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby x uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 2 x e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 1 x f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative 1 x transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (e.g. compatibility x with San Luis Obispo Co. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation will have no impact on traffic. If annexed, future site development will be subject to the City's traffic impact fees which were established (Resolution No. 8406) to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City's streets, transit, and bikeway facilities. Air traffic compatibility is discussed in Section 1. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal affect: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats 10 x (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals or birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 10 x c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, 1,10 x coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? 1,10 x e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 1,10 x CONCLUSION: Not significatat. Based on information in the application, a field inspection, and a review of relevant references in the Department, staff has determined that there is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? x b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and x inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral x resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself has no impact on energy conservation. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous 3, 4, x substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, 13 chemicals or radiation)? 14 b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan x or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health x hazard? " 3-48 Issues and Supporting Informatt... Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation Incorporated d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential x health hazards? . e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, x grass or trees? Annexation is not anticipated to result in the creation or exposure of people to any known health hazards. Due to the site's close. proximity to old petroleum transmission mains, there may be areas of "undefined" contamination within the project site. England & Associates' reports have defined areas of contamination along Tank Farm Road down to 100 ppm and indicate the portion of this along Tank Farm Road is affected by contamination. A Phase I site assessment was prepared for this site by International Technology Corporation in December 1999. It indicates that petroleum hydrocarbons are present in the ground water. Prior to issuance of any building or grading permit, the developer/owner must remove all site contamination or clearly define the areas of contamination and justify that such areas pose no threat to human health and/or the environment. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant unless mitigated. Annexation by itself poses no health hazard. Soil and water contamination is present on site and may affect future site development. Trenching related to connection to city water and sewer service may encounter soil contamination. Mitigation Measures: Prior to future site development or issuance of any grading or building permit: A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to issuance of building or grading permits. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? 1 x b) Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as 1 x defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element? The anticipated manufacturing use is not a noise-sensitive use as described by the Noise Element of the General Plan. Nor are there noise-sensitive uses in the vicinity of the project site. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself has no noise impacts. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? 13 x b) Police protection? 13 x c) Schools? x d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 13 x e) Other governmental services? 13 x CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will not have any significant impact on public services. Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to accommodate future site development. 12 3-49 Issues and Supporting Informati�.. Sources Sources Potenti, Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? x b) Communications systems? x c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution 13 x facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? 13 x e) Storm water drainage? x f) Solid waste disposal? x Local or regional water supplies? F7, 15 x CONCLUSION: Annexation will not have any significant impact on public services. Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to ensure adequate delivery of city services to this site. Water Supply The Utilities Department has reviewed these annexation applications and determined that they are consistent with the Water Management Element and that there is sufficient water available to serve site development. The City of San Luis Obispo obtains its water from a combination of surface and groundwater sources. Adopted safe annual yield from these sources is 7,735 acre-feet per year. The City is pursuing the development of additional water supplies, including the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, the Salinas Reservoir Expansion Project, and the Water Reuse Project. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable needs, such as landscape watering, will reduce demand on potable water supplies. This is likely to be the first additional source developed and is projected to yield roughly 1200 acre-feet per year. Half that amount would be held in reserve. The other half would be used in place of potable water, thereby increasing the amount of potable water available for allocation by roughly 600 acre feet per year.. Planning for future water use in the city is based on an average consumption of 145 gallons per day per person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption during and since the most recent drought. Based on this water use rate and current city population, present demand is about 6,962 acre-feet per year. This number is recalculated annually using updated population estimates from the California Department of Finance. The difference between safe annual yield and present demand is 773 acre-feet per year, which is available to serve new development. Half this amount (386 acre- feet) is available for development in annexation areas. Until retrofit of the entire city is essentially complete, all developers are subject to the City's Water Allocation regulations and must retrofit existing facilities with low-flow plumbing fixtures in order to offset twice the expected demand of their development prior to issuance of a building permit. The Utilities Department staff estimates that remaining opportunities for retrofitting could reduce current water use by 500 acre-feet per year. Existing development on site is currently supplied by well water. The applicant could continue to use well water for landscape irrigation to reduce demand for city water. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The project's estimated water demand is very low - less than 1 acre- foot per year. Compliance with Water Allocation regulations will ensure water supply availability. 13. AESTHETICS. Would theproposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? x 13 3-50 Issues and Supporting Informatn... Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impac[ ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? x c) Create light or glare? x CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no aesthetic impacts. Any future redevelopment of the site to be annexed will be subject to architectural review and approval to ensure against negative aesthetic impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? x b) Disturb archaeological resources? x c) Affect historical resources? x d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which x would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the x potential impact area? CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no impact on cultural resources. Future site development will be subject to the City's Archaeological Resource Guidelines. Phase 1 reports prepared for nearby properties (A&R Welding and Farm Supply Annexation sites) indicate there are no resources present. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks x or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? x Not applicable. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the x 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, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The applicant is requesting approval of an annexation and prezoning only. The site is currently developed. Neither of these requests will result in any direct physical impact to the environment. Extension of utility lines will only affect the right-of-way and other already developed areas of the site. Any future development of the project site is subject to California Environmental Quality Act requirements for further environmental review. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- x term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? Short-term and long-term goals are the same. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually x limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively 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 futureprojects) The annexation will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the environment. However, each annexation and development project is subject to environmental review and compliance with adopted policies related to growth management and resource availability 14 3-51 Issues and Supporting Informatit.— oources Sources Potentia Potentially Less That, No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues unless Impact mitigation Incorporated d) Does the project have environmental effects which will x cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? There are no known significant hazards associated with annexation. Mitigation is recommended to reduce to a less than significant level the potential for human beings to be exposed to unsafe soil contamination as a result of oil leaks in Unocal's transmission lines which run down Tank Farm Road. 15 3-52 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. NA b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. NA c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions of the project. NA Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff V. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990). 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan: Land Use, Circulation, Noise, Energy, Open Space, Seismic Safety, Water and Wastewater Management Elements 2. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 3. Phase I Site Assessment for 196 Suburban Road, IT Corp., December, 1999, Project # 79951 1.28 4. Health Risk Assessment and health and Safety Plan addressing the Tank Farm Road Pipeline, prepared by England and Associates, 1996 and 1997, Project #'s 147-H and 147-1 5. County of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo Area Plan, January 1997 6. City of San Luis Obispo Source Reduction and Recycling Element 7. City of San Luis Obispo Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines 8. SLO County Airport Land Use Plan 9. Soils Engineering Report for the A & R Welding Company prepared by Buena Engineers, Inc. Job No. B-16606-SL1. September, 1986 10. City of San Luis Obispo Informational Map Atlas 11. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990 12. Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation 13. City Department and other agency comments 14. Brown and Caldwell Site Investigation Report for Tank Farm Properties, August 16, 1996 15. Memo from Tim Girvin regarding water allocation, dated January 18, 2000 3-53 ER 213-99 Pacific Bell AnnexatiL ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity map Site location map showing all three annexations General Plan designations map City zoning map Site plan of existing development Soil contamination map Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation City Department Comments Memo from Tim Girvin regarding water allocation 19. MITIGATION MEASURES/MONITORING PROGRAM Solid 1. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for Waste recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 2. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. Monitoring Program: City Council review, architectural review and building permit issuance. Soil Mitigation Measures: Prior to future site development or issuance of any building or grading Contamin- permit: ation 3. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to final annexation. 4. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 5. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without evidence of deed notification and the requirement for compliance with recommendations in the health and risk assessments. 17 3-54 b eQ Y^ Y IwV W i SOCIAL SECURITY M o » V t U OFFICE ■ Q VII3 San Blas o d Prado m m a La R O ROad 1 �� Iwt.l o`S4 o i Prado Road:,:.... Boo BORDER 0 Mobile/ y F 1 Park ca Granada .,•: rive m Meissner arse Cook Hind Ln. C, Business Park Farm -4*--Supply n�' r S ; : Site ` d Mariposa ' I Tank Farm Road as Praderas O� J ,Short St. :..: A&R Welding N � ` huparrosa Site Or' D;r. O �j �n .i Verdes y Sub rban Road �O&/ Los "'2 - PacBell o. �U us- .J s Oso J i alley ' �'t/a�+r 4 N_ . •L o �jNTFSSORI z MLDRFN'S SCHOOL j V Pita Qom• i s 'sra Not to Scale-- Ln s S Existing San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of: i� A&R Welding, Farm Supply, Concurrently-Proposed Annexation Areas and PacBell .................. To: City of San Luis Obispo CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED l�n Site Locations ANNEXATION AREAS ASSOCIATES 980115 3 Exhibits.pm651211199 3-55 MARGARITA 'NN 7 AREA -4- - ----HIGtJERA 9MMERCE PARK NN, Farmt t -A& 9 te \N\ -/N`N N' x NNNN N, N, NN� N, \x N, N, 777_ N\ N., N 'N. N, N' N IN N\ \\\ \\ NN N RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE: A large area for the development of a Land to remain open for the protection, variety of housing types along with use,and enjoyment of natural resources. supporting uses such as parks, elemen- While they are not shown on this map, tary schools,and convenience shopping. all creeks are within this category. GOVERNMENT FACILITIES: SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING: Business services,wholesaling and sales of large items,and light manufacturing. (Note:see policies for airport area) RECREATION: BUSINESS PARK: Publicly or privately owned recreationAn area to be kept in low intensity uses i facilities,either outdoors or buildings n until developed as a campus-like setting a park setting. under a master plan. CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED City of San Luis Obispo ASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS General Plan Designations 98011513 Exhibb.pm65 12/1/99 3-56 C-S C-S-S { C-S-SP M-SP — — - Farm Supply m (Prezone C-S) R-2-S C/Or':LOJ AM Welding (Prezone C-S) R-1 C-S C-S S u \\ PacBelI (Prezone M) R-1-PD M R-2-PD City Limit Line Urban Reserve Line 200 0 200 400 Feet Concurrently Proposed ExistmG ana puoposeo Annexation Areas zoninc, 6eslGnations 50 0 50 109Is SUBURBAN STREET a _ I Jz m DO In � U Z Q O) N Q Z U t Q W J Q j a � a � a Zw 1 t Z) wDN 3m ~ mO Ir 7 t (n V O Z N � O � J z Y I t N mME O t t O � I t a G Z O Ln m =m m g O Q N - Y W U 1 Oi I ice` NW �Jaa 1 1 m I W C� �Up 1 1 W 3 z V) 0Zz O N Q H U (n 1 O J O7 W LLJ V 3 t C O Q Z li CO Z 1 i m Ln 00 O 4 r Z dZ � U I LOZO a < X r Q J O W Li V) � f � „ � �, ► , � 1 ! ! III 3-58 t N Cq / Al In' � J C F�f X- --r---— / —A—LIJ F N _ 13 C3a o a o a OQ a = rx v x o S r 7V �aX 3> s 7 9 00JLJ S e a0n o 0 L= = o z I x x-X-X $ _ n a 9A M' m X� —�xx- Q . x goo ID 6 X n O � C� 3 =tir-7 X x x I x x x X x Wll C Z Ul En O D z z a Mo r ,� �x- ON O 7i N D 0 O I I -t D Z ti3" mr m � n n -x x xX dX x X x O 0 O O ~O D O H x 0 DDD \+ 0 - n� r =1 r' o 0 U 'qO OZ O � ~7+ o � i o z a - a o x nZ Zm Z Y II�U (r1 0 � e w r July 26, 1999 Jill Viggiano Pacific Bell 2600 Camino Ramon, Room 1N050I San Ramon, CA 94583 Re: Annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo Dear Ms. Viggiano: You have requested information concerning fees and conditions that would be applicable in the event the approximately 4.3 acre Pacific Bell property located at 196 Suburban Road were annexed to the City of San Luis Obispo. Provided below is City Staff's estimate of costs based on the City Council adopted Interim Annexation Policy, and development fee schedules effective July 1, 1999. Additional fee increases recently adopted by the City Council will become effective August 15, 1999. Annexation and development applications received as complete for processing by the City prior to that time will be charged at the current rates, even though they may not be finally acted upon until after the increased rates go into effect.. The Interim Annexation Policy was adopted by Council for use prior to adoption of an Airport Area Specific Plan which will include properties in this general area. That plan is now being prepared and should be adopted within the next nine to twelve months. The Policy is intended to accommodate applicants who have immediate development interest prior to plan adoption, and would otherwise be required to develop under County jurisdiction with a potential for redundant (and possibly unnecessary) costs for lesser service. This premise is not applicable to the Pacific Bell property which is already completely developed; annexation would routinely have to wait until the specific plan is adopted. However, your westerly property line is contiguous with our City boundary, and the owner of the property adjoining north and east to you (A&R Welding) is desirous of early annexation. They conform to the early annexation policy except for contiguity with the existing city boundary. Thus, they are dependent upon the annexation of your property to engage in the annexation process at this time. Our assumption is that, if you choose to proceed, both properties would be annexed concurrently. BACKGROUND The Pacific Bell property in question is an approximately 4.3 acre parcel located at 196 Suburban Road(County Assessor's designation 076-352-033), contiguous easterly to the 3-60 Page 2. City of San Luis Obispo boundary. A long 30 foot wide driveway extends northerly from the larger rectangular portion of the site to Tank Farm Road, creating dual frontages of approximately 325 feet on the North side of Suburban Road, and 30 feet on the South side of Tank Farm Road. The property is completely occupied with a Pacific Bell service facility, and there are no immediate plans to redevelop the site. Private well water and septic sewage facilities are currently utilized. Frontage improvements and street paving are in place along both street frontages. IMPACT FEES Annexation of the subject parcel would not result in a requirement to pay any impact fees. Following annexation, any new construction or redevelopment of the site would be subject to the following: Water: Following annexation, at the time you wish to obtain City water service you must create a water allocation based upon the proposed use, and pay an impact fee. At the present time the allocation would be developed through retrofitting existing water-using facilities in the City. The cost of retrofitting is credited up to $150 per bathroom retrofitted against the water impact fee. For commercial properties the impact fee is based on the size of the water meter required to provide the amount of water service needed, and is subject to several variables. For example, you may choose to use your existing well water for landscape irrigation purposes, and thus reduce your required allocation and commodity charge (monthly water bill). A dual system such as this will require prior approval of an agreement between Pacific Bell and the City. Pacific Bell would be responsible for extending the public water main in Suburban Road at its full planned size (12") to your easterly property line, and installing necessary fire hydrants along your frontage, unless these facilities are constructed as a condition imposed on a different project. The currently developed portion of your facility could continue to rely on the existing private well after annexation until you desire to connect to the City system, or the system failed. Connection to the City's water system for fire protection purposes only would not require a water allocation, but would be subject to a small monthly access charge. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any property where a connection to the City water system is established in conjunction with continued use of an on-site well. Wastewater: Pacific Bell would be required to extend the existing sewer main in Suburban Road at its full planned size (8") to your easterly property line. A 3-61 wastewater impact fee will be required upon connection to the City's sewer system following annexation. The fee amount is determined by the size of the Page 3. water meter installed, or an equivalent size as determined by the City if a City water service is not utilized. Under current City policy, the septic system serving the existing buildings on your site could continue to be used until it failed, or needed to be replaced for other reasons. Any new construction would be required to connect to the City sewer system. Examples of fees are: Water Impact fee, 1" meter $13,296 Wastewater Impact fee, 1"meter $ 5,478 Transportation: Existing development at the time of annexation is not subject to transportation impact fees. An impact fee would be applicable to any new structures, or the expansion of existing structures, which require City building permits. The fee is currently $1.47 per square foot for new "service commercial" construction; and$7.82 per square foot for new"industrial"construction. PROCESSING FEES Current After August 15, 1999 Annexation $2,900 $5,200 Prezoning $2,412 $4,342 Environmental Review $ 679 $1,177 Public Works Plan Check and Inspection Fees would be assessed at the following rates for water and sewer main extensions, any road improvements that may be found to be necessary, and similar infrastructure improvements: Improvement Plan Check: $299 plus 1.5% of construction costs Construction Inspection: $1,422 plus 6.1% of construction costs Additional fees such as architectural review, building plan check and construction inspection, and affordable housing would be charged after annexation in conjunction with processing approvals for any new construction. OPEN SPACE FEE Given that your site is completely developed, the City's open space acquisition fee of $2,500 per undeveloped acre, or dedication of "equivalent credible acreage", as required by the Interim Annexation Policy, is not applicable. 3-62 Page 4. DEFERRED AREA-WIDE IMPACT FEE This fee represents an undeveloped properties' share of area-wide infrastructure for the buildout of the airport area, such as major roads, trunk water and sewer improvements, and storm drain improvements,that are beyond those associated with the direct extension of service to your property. As your property is completely developed, this $15,538 per undeveloped acre fee is not applicable. OTHER ISSUES Following the completion of annexation, evaluation of any future new construction on Pacific Bell property will include consideration of general improvement needs in the vicinity, and could result in conditions of approval for the new construction. Example of such considerations include installation of street lights as necessary, planting of street trees at the rate of one tree per 35 feet of street frontage, and provision as necessary of detailed hydraulic and hydrologic analyses to establish 100 year storm flooding depths/elevations to assure that new structures or building pads are at least one foot above those elevations in accordance with City and Federal Flood Plain Management Policies. The subject property lies within a 100 year storm flood hazard zone, as determined by the County's current Flood Insurance Rate Map. A proposed amendment of that map may show a reduced flood hazard boundary, and may result in removal of this Flood Plain designation within your property Important Note: The above estimated costs relate only to the costs associated with the annexation and development of the Pacific Bell property in the City of San Luis Obispo. Your ongoing "cost of doing business", including municipally assessed taxes, franchise fees, and property taxes are matters to be estimated by you. If you need information to assist you with those estimates, please contact Linda Asprion, Revenue Manager at 781-7126. ANNEXATION COST SUMMARY Our best estimate of costs which you can expect at the time of annexation would be: Current After August 15, 1999 Processing Fees $5,991 $10,719 3-63 As indicated above, there will be additional processing fees and improvement costs associate with utility connection, or further development of the Pacific Bell property once annexation is completed. These will be consistent with similar charges assessed Page 5. any other property within the City upon development, and are not established by the annexation process. If you have any other questions regarding the information presented above, or other aspects of annexation to the city,please let me know. Sincerely, Arnold B.Jonas Community Development Director c: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer 3-64 Public Works The following comments are to be applied generally to all three annexations (appl #'s 206-99, 188-99 & 213-99: The processing of the three adjacent annexations at the same time presents an issue regarding the inclusion of Tank Farm Road (TFR). Since it cannot be "guaranteed" that all three annexations will be completed at the same time, each annexation (Application #'s 206-99, 188-99 & 213-99) must include all of TFR right of way between the existing City Limits and each respective annexation. This will insure that if one annexation is not completed, or delayed, the annexation of TFR will be continuous and without"gaps" remaining under County jurisdiction. The site is already developed (under County standards) and there are no requirements for improvements as a condition of annexation by this department. However, any further development of this property would require completion of sidewalk improvements, street lighting and any additional street trees to meet City standards. 1. Site access limitations (left turns in and out) along Tank Farm Rd. will be imposed with development of adjacent property and/or at some future date, in conjunction with installation of a future landscaped median. 2. Completion of sidewalk improvements and street trees along the Suburban Rd. frontage of the property, street lighting, etc., per City standards. 3. Extension of sewer and water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances, per City code requirements. Any existing wells (active or inactive, unless properly abandoned) would require water services to the site (including fire lines) to incorporate approved backflow prevention devices. 4. Water & Sewer impact fees would be required to be paid prior to connecting to City mains, along with water retrofit and allocation requirements, per applicable policy and rates at such time. 3-65 Fire Prevention Memorandum To: Whitney Mc wain From: Darren Drake, Fire Marshal Date: December 2, 1999 Re: 196 Suburban—Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Water Supplies: Water supplies shall be in accordance with Sections 901 and 903 of the California Fire Code. An approved water supply connected to the City distribution system and capable of providing the required fire flow for fire protection is required. The fire flow shall be determining using Appendix III-A of the California Fire Code. Fire Hydrants: Fre hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the California Fre Code. The location, number and type of hydrants connected to the City system shall be determined using Appendix III-B of the California Fre Code and the approved City Engineering Standards. Miscellaneous: Prior to annexation a facility fire and life-safety inspection shall be conducted and a technical report provided to the City Fire Department. The report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer, specialist or other person acceptable to the Chief and the owner and shall analyze the fire and frfe-safety properties of the facilities and operations. 1 3-66 city of san lues onispo utilities conseuvation office Memorandum January 18, 2000 To: Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner From: Tim A. Girvin, Utilities Conservation Technician Subject: Pacific Bell Annexation The current owner of the parcel to be annexed has supplied sufficient information to estimate the water use for the site. The current well shall continue to be used for irrigation so the water use for the site is based on indoor water consumption for the employees at the site and vehicle maintenance activities. Because there was no metered consumption for the site, I have calculated the water use based on the number of people at the facility. The table below lists estimated water use for 20 employees that remain at the site all day, and 73 employees that use the site as a staging area. Additionally, there are approximately 70 vehicles that are maintained at the site which includes a steam cleaner / wash facility. No. of People Bathroom use Incidental use Acre Feet/Yr. 20 5 times / day add 20% .076 73 2.5 times / day add 20% .139 Vehicles Washing Activity Acre Feet/Yr. 70 10 Gal. /Wk. For each 35 vehicles .03 Total AF Req'd. .245 These estimates assume there are low flow fixtures installed at the site. If this is not the case, retrofitting of the facility will be required. 3-67 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING .AND BUILDING VICTOR MOLANDA,AICP BRYCE TINCLE.AICP AS515TANT DIRECTOR ELLEN CARROLL ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR BARNEY MCCAY January 25, 2000 CHIEF 8VILOINC OFFICIAL PATRICK BRUN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE.OFFICER Community Development Dept./Whitney Mcllvaine City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93041 SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PERMIT NO. 213-99 - PACIFIC BELL (ANNEXATION) Thank you for referring the above project to the Airport Land Use Commission. The proposed annexation is compatible with the San Luis Obispo County Airport's Land Use Plan (ALUP). On January 19, 2000, the Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the application, and recommends that the City approve the project with the conditions in the attached report(including Condition No. 3 prohibiting churches). Please call me if you have questions or comments (781-5701). Sincerely Ted Bench Airport Land Use Commission COuNn GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN LUIS OBISPO • CALIFORNIA 93408 - (805)781-5600 1-800-834-4636 EMAIL: ipcoping@s)onet.org • FAX: (805)781-1242 WEBSITE: http://www.sionet.org/vv/ipcoping 3-68 A&R WELDING ANNEXATION ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY ER 188-99 3-69 i������������I�fl►�►►IIIII11111111�i����►►����i IIili cityof oBispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ER 188-99 1 . Project Title: A & R Welding Annexation, Annx / R / ER / ARC 188-99 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 3. Contact Person and, Phone Number: Associate Planner Whitney Mcllvaine, 781-7164 4. Project Location: 205 Tank Farm Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: David Erbstoesser, 205 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Services and Manufacturing 7. Current County Zoning: Commercial Service 8. Description of the Project: The applicant is requesting annexation of roughly 2.9 acres of property on the south side of Tank Farm Road. The area to be annexed is developed with a welding service and supply business. Approximately 1 .76 acres of the site is currently vacant. The applicant is proposing to develop this area with a new 23,000 square foot commercial building. 9. Entitlements Requested: Annexation, Prezoning, and Architectural Review 10. Surrounding Land Uses: Agriculture and other service-commercial and manufacturing operations. 11 . Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Local Agency Formation Commission OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and actiy]ies/O Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. s 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. X Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing X Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems X Hazards Recreation Water Noise X Mandatory Findings of Significance X Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation Systems - There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects I�X�1 on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. F-1 The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there X will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an 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 2 3-71 analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ther 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 imposed upon the proposed project. January 28, 2000 Argna!yx6 Date 7 i Ronald Whisenand, Development Review Manager Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. Printed Name For 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 the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 3-72 Issues and Supporting Informat,- . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1,2,5 x 6 b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies 8,12 x adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? 13 c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 1,2 x d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impac 1,10 x to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible lanc uses? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of ar x established community (including a low-income o minority community)? Zoning The City's general plan applies a designation of Services and Manufacturing to this site. To be consisten with this land use designation the site must be zoned either Service-Commercial (C-S) or Manufacturing (M). The draft Airport Area Specific Plan indicates that Service-Commercial would be the most appropriate zoning. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Consistency with general plan polices and zoning regulations is best achieved by prezoning the subject property C-S, Service-Commercial. Agricultural Compatibility CONCLUSION: Not significant. The closest agricultural field is across Tank Farm Road to the northeast. This property is also proposed for annexation and development. Airport Compatibility On the City general plan land use map and in Figure 9 (Airport Area map) of the Land Use Element, the site is included within the boundaries of the Airport Area. The project site is located in Airport Land Use Area as shown in the Airport Land Use Plan. Annexation and the proposed development of the project sitewas reviewed and approved by the Airport Land Use Commission on January 19, 2000. Site development will be subject to ALUC conditions of approval. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will not impact airport operations. Site development will be subject to Airport Land Use Commission conditions of approval. Land Use Element Policies Ultimately this site is envisioned by both City and County land use plans to be annexed to the City. It is the policy of City Council to process interim annexations in the airport area while simultaneously working toward the goal of preparing a specific plan for this area. Governing Policies: • 7.2 Airport Land Use Plan Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed. 4 3-73' Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Not significant. Site development is subject to the Airport Land Use Commission conditions of approval. ♦ 7.4 Greenbelt Protection Annexation of the Airport Area, whether it occurs as one action or several, shall be consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area annexation shall not take effect unless the annexe area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of th following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. This policy applies only to undeveloped acreage. The pre-annexatio agreement states that the applicant will pay open spacein-lieu fees for the 1.76 acres of undeveloped site area. ♦ 7.5 Internal Open Space The areas designated for urban uses, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as sit amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Open Space Element. In addition, wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. CONCLUSION: Not significant. This site is not identified in the Open Space Element as having resources which must be protected. • 7.6 Development Before Annexation A. Areas which are designated for eventual urban development may be developed during the interim with rural residential or rural commercial uses. In such areas, County development standards and discretionary review should assure that projects will not preclude options for future urban development consistent with the City's planning policies and standards. Before an discretionary County land-use or land-division approval for such areas, a development plan for the site should be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainage proposals will be compatible with future annexation and urban development. B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation shout comply with City standards for roadway cross-sections, bus stops, walking and bicycle paths, landscaping, view protection, setbacks, preferred site layouts, and architectural character. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Upon annexation, site development will be subject to City standards. • 7.7 Transit Service Transit service linking development sites with the citywide bus system should be provided concurrent with any additional urban development in the Airport Area. 5 3-74 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Not significant. The need for additional transit facilities will be reviewed in conjunction with new development on this site or other new development in the vicinity. The Short Range Transit Plan doe not show any new service along Tank Farm Road. • 7.8 Specific Plan The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainage within the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The City Council has directed the preparation of a specific plan for the Airport Area. The applicant is willing to contribute a pro-rated share of the cost of specific plan preparation. ♦ 7.14 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties secure protectio for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help 'maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned Ian outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu o dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area soul of the City's urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. See discussion under policies 7.4 and 7.5. ♦ 1.13 Annexation and Services ♦ 1.13.1 Water & Sewer Service The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections or contracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity-flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity-flow or pumps in the City sewer system. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation into the City will ensure compliance with this policy. In addition, the property is located inside the City's urban reserve line. See also the water supply discussion under Utilities and Service Systems. ♦ 1.13.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing Annexation should be used as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urban development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve lin which are to be developed with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. Th City may annex an area long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas whit are to remain permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city approved specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development wil reflect topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing an proposed land uses and roads. Annexation of this site is consistent with this policy in so far as it calls for annexation before further urban development. Topography poses no issue since the site is essentially flat. Needed capital facilities an funding are outlined in the attached letter from the Community Development Director to the applicant. This site is partially developed. The applicant has submitted a development plan for the vacant portion of the site 6 3-75 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated The pre-annexation agreement states that property owners and their successors will agree to support formation of an assessment district if that is the approach adopted by the City for funding the specific plan and infrastructure improvements. Services and frontage improvements will be addressed through the architectural review process. The existing land use, a gas distributor, is consistent with the general plan Ian use designation of Services and Manufacturing. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Urban development and annexation of this site are envisioned in both Cit and County land use plans. ♦ 1.13.3 Required Plans Land in any of the following annexation areas may be developed only after the City has adopted a plan for land uses, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing o public facilities for the area. The plan shall provide for open space protection consistent with polic 1.13.5. A. For the Airport area, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area. Until a specific plan is adopted properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application for annexation; and 6. The applicant agrees to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area-wid infrastructure improvements according to a cost-sharing plan maintained by the City. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. A specific plan for the Airport Area is not yet complete. The applicant's request is consistent with the interim annexation criteria listed above. The applicant's compliance with the interim plan will be guaranteed through a formal written agreement between the applicant and the City. ♦ 1.13.4 Development and Services Actual development in an annexed area may be approved only when adequate City services can be provided for that development, without reducing the level of services o increasing the cost of services for existing development and for build-out within the City limits as of July 1994, in accordance with the City's water management policies. The water management policies may allow part of the water retrofit credit that would be needed for build-out within the 1994 city limits to be used for annexation projects. Water for development in an annexed area may be made available b any one or any combination of the following: A. City water supply, including reclaimed water; B. Reducing usage of City water in existing development so that there will be no net increase in long-term water usage; C. Private well water, but only as an interim source, pending availability of an approved addition t City water sources, and when it is demonstrated that use of the well water will not diminish the City's municipal groundwater supply. The applicant plans to extend city water and sewer lines and connect to these city services. The applican will have to develop a water allocation before connecting to city services. Currently, this requires that the applicant retrofit existing plumbing fixtures throughout the city to save twice the amount of water that site development is anticipated to use. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Connection to city water and future site development under the 3-76 Issues and Supporting Informat,. . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less an No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation mitigation Incorporated jurisdiction of the City will be subject to the City's water allocation regulations. Preliminary analysis of existing and future site development by Utilities Department staff indicates the project is unlikely to use more than 2 acre-feet of water per year. See also the water supply discussion under Utilities and Service Systems. ♦ 1.13.5 Open Space ♦ Each annexation shall help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open Space, and for th habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that are identified in policy 6.1.1. Policies concerning prime agricultural land shall apply when appropriate. The following standards shall apply t the indicated areas: D. Airport Area properties shall secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open spat protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the propert is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's southerly urban reserve line CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Site specific resources identified in the Open Space Element are the Unocal wetlands, which do not extend onto the project site. The applicant will be contributing open spat in-lieu fees for the vacant portion of the project site. ♦ 1.14 Costs of Growth The costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the ne development, unless the community chooses to help pay thecosts for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City will adopt a development-fee program and other appropriate financing measures, so that new development pays its share of the costs of new services and facilities needed to serve it. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Anticipated infrastructure needs for future development. are outlined in comments from the City's Public Works Department. The applicant has agreed to contribute to the cost o planning and infrastructure needs in the Airport Area consistent with the City's Interim Annexation Policy. Project specific infrastructure needs will be addressed as conditions of site development. ♦ 1.15 Solid Waste Capacity In addition to other requirements for adequate resources and services prior to development, the Cit must determine that adequate solid waste disposal capacity will be available before granting an discretionary land use approval which would increase solid waste generation. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. Solid waste from this site is delivered to Cold Canyon landfill, which has a capacity to accept solid waste for approximately 18.5 years, based on the current rate of disposal an ongoing trends showing a reduction in per capita waste generation. Measures to reduce solid waste are still needed to improve compliance with the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per person per year. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach it capacity in the year 2018. The act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow o materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. As of 1998 (the date for which latest figures are available),.San Luis Obispo had reduced its waste stream by 34%. 8 3-77 Issues and Supporting Informat.. . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially ss an No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated To help reduce the ongoing waste stream, the current operation should include facilities for both interior an exterior recycling. to reduce the unrecycled waste stream generated by the project consistent with th Source Reduction and Recycling Element. To help reduce waste generated by future site development, a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded demolition and construction materials should be submitted with the building permit application. Mitigation Measures: Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-sit recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall b submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local populatiot 1 x projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly o x indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable x housing? The Land Use Element (LUE) growth management provisions (section 1.0 of the LUE) call for limitations o the number of residences that may be built every year, to maintain an average growth rate of one percen per year during the 1990s. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will not impact population. Any expansion in jobs is not anticipated to be significant and such jobs are likely to be filled by local residents. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? 11 x b) Seismic ground shaking? 1 x c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 x d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? x e) Landslides or mudflows? 1 x f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil 1 x conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? 9 x h) Expansive soils? 9 x i) Unique geologic or physical features? 10 x There are no known faults on site or in the immediate vicinity. The site is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California, and strong ground shaking should be expected during the life of on-sit structures. Any structures must be designed. in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the Uniform Building Code. Soils Engineering Reports prepared for the A&R Welding site indicate no likelihood o liquefaction or subsidence, but also note that expansive soils are present in this area. The site is essential) flat with no unique geologic or physical features. 9 3-78 Issues and Supporting Informat,_., Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues Unless Impact mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Less than significant. A soils report prepared for the existing on-site development conclude there are no known geological or soils conditions that would make this site unsuitable fordevelopment. Building permits will require site specific testing to ensure compliance with applicable building codes. 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the 1,13 x rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards x such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of x surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water x body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water x movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either througt x direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception 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 x otherwise available for public water supplies? CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Development of the vacant portion of the site will increase impervious surfacing. Development plans indicate the historic drainage pattern will not be significantly altered. Water flows to the southwest corner of the site. This area is proposed to be used for parking with the ability to ac as a detention area for storm water. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an 7 x existing or projected air quality violation (Compliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines)? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants x c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause x any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? x Short-term Impacts During project construction, there will be increased levels of fugitive dust associated with construction an grading activities, as well as construction emissions associated with heavy duty construction equipment. Compliance with the dust management practices contained in Municipal Code Section 15.04.040 X. (Sec. 3307.2) will adequately mitigate short-term impacts. No further mitigation is necessary. Long-Term Impacts San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State ozone and PM,o (fine particulate matter 1 microns or less in diameter) air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non-attainment 10 3-79 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent . Potentially L:ssThan No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation [slues unless Impact mitigation Incorporated pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. Th 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to meet that requirement. The CAP is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1.18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan. Motor vehicles account for about 40% of the precursor emissions responsible for ozone formation, and are also a significant source of PM10. Thus, a major requirement in the CAP is the implementation of transportation control measures designed to reduce motor vehicle trips and miles traveled by local residents The APCD recommends that site development include the following mitigation measures to encourage transportation alternatives to the single occupant vehicle and make the project attractive to bicyclists an pedestrians. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. Site development will impact air quality as a result of construction activity and traffic generated by uses established. Standard mitigation is recommended to reduce impact resulting from construction activity and future site development. Mitigation Measure: 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; and • extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? 13 x b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp x curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment))? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby x uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 13 x e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? x f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative x transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (e.g. compatibility x with San Luis Obispo Co. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation by itself has no impact on traffic. If annexed, future site development will be subject to the City's traffic impact fees which were established (Resolution No. 8406) to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City's streets, transit, and bikeway facilities. Air traffic compatibility is discussed in Section 1. Public Works and Transportation Division staff have reviewed this project and determined that the Tank Farm Road alignment will accommodate any additional traffi generated by future site development. On-site parking is subject to zoning regulation standards and will b addressed as part of the architectural review. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal affect: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats 10 x (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals or birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 10 x " 3-80 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation mitigation Incorporated c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest 1,10 x coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? 1,10 x e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 1,10 x CONCLUSION: Not significant. Based on information in the application, a field inspection, and a review o relevant references in the Department, staff has determined that there is no evidence before the Departmen that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 1 x b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 1 x inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral x resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? The Energy Element states that, "New development will be encouraged to minimize the use of conventiona energy for space heating and cooling, water heating, and illumination by means of proper design an orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure." The City implements energy conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code which establishes energy conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Buildings proposed as part of this project must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals through architectural review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying o mechanical systems to maintain comfort. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. To be consistent with adopted energy conservation policies and avoid using non-renewable resources in an inefficient manner, the following standard mitigation is recommended: Mitigation Measure: New buildings constructed on this site 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. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shat document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous 3,4, x substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, 13 chemicals or radiation)? 14 b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan 13 x or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health 13 x hazard? 14 d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential 13 x health hazards? 14 e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, 13 x grass or trees? 3-81 Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation mitigation Incorporated Annexation is not anticipated to result in the creation or exposure of people to any known health hazards Due to the site's close proximity to old petroleum transmission mains, there may be areas of "undefined" contamination within the project site. England & Associates' reports have defined areas of contaminatio along Tank Farm Road down to 100 ppm and indicate the portion of this along Tank Farm Road is affecte by contamination. Prior to issuance of any building or grading permit, the developer/owner must remove al site contamination or clearly define the areas of contamination and justify that such areas pose no threat t human health and/or the environment. Mitigation is recommended to ensure areas of contamination will pos no significant threat to human health and/or the environment. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant unless mitigated. Site development is likely to encounter soil contamination. Mitigation Measure: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fir Chief prior to building or grading permit issuance. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates fo Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? 1 x b) Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as 1 x defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element? CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself has no noise impacts. The anticipated light industrial use is not a noise-sensitive use as described by the Noise Element of the General Plan. Nor are there noise sensitive uses in the vicinity of the project site. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? 13 x b) Police protection? 13 x c) Schools? x d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 13 x e) Other governmental services? 13 x CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will not have any impact on public services. Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to accommodate additional site development. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? x b) Communications systems? x c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution 13 x facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? 13 x e) Storm water drainage? 13 x f) Solid waste disposal? 6 x 13 3-82 Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues unless Impact mitigation Incorporated g) Local or regional water supplies? 1 x Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to ensure adequate delivery of city services to this site. In order to implement the goals and objectives of the San Luis Obispo General Plan, and to provide adequate water supply and treatment facilities, and wastewater collection and treatment facilities, to serve new development in the city of San Luis Obispo and to mitigate the impacts of that new development, certain public facilities and improvements must be, or had to be, constructed. The city council has determined that connection fees are needed in order to finance these facilities and improvements and to pay for new development's fair share of the construction costs of these facilities and improvements. Site development will be subject to payment of water and wastewater impact fees and construction of infrastructure necessary to deliver services to the project site. Water Distribution — The applicant will have to extend the water main in Tank Farm Road in order to hook up to City water. This will be a condition of site development. Sewer — The applicant will have to extend the sewer main in Tank Farm Road in order to connect City sewer service. Storm Water - Discussed under Water above. Solid Waste - Discussed under Land Use and Planning above. The Utilities Department has reviewed these annexation applications and determined that they are consisten with the Water Management Element and that there is sufficient water available to serve site development. The City of San Luis Obispo obtains its water from a combination of surface and groundwater sources. Adopted safe annual yield from these sources is 7,735 acre-feet per year. The City is pursuing the development of additional water supplies, including the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, the Salinas Reservoi Expansion Project, and the Water Reuse Project. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable needs, suc as landscape watering, will reduce demand on potable water supplies. This is likely to be the first additiona source developed and is projected to yield roughly 1200 acre-feet per year. Half that amount would be hel in reserve. The other half would be used in place of potable water, thereby increasing the amount of potabl water available for allocation by roughly 600 acre feet per year.. Planning for future water use in the city is based on an average consumption of 145 gallons per day per person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption during and since the most recent drought. Based on this water use rate and current city population, presen demand is about 6,962 acre-feet per year. This number is recalculated annually using updated populatio estimates from the California Department of Finance. The difference between safe annual yield and presen demand is 773 acre-feet per year, which is available to serve new development. Half this amount (386 acre- feet) is available for development in annexation areas. Until retrofit of the entire city is essentially complete, all developers are subject to the 'City's Water Allocation regulations and must retrofit existing facilities with low-flow plumbing fixtures in order to offset twice the expected demand of their development prior to issuance of a building permit. The Utilities Department staff estimates that remaining opportunities for retrofitting could reduce current water use b 500 acre-feet per year. Existing development on site is currently supplied by well water. The applicant could continue to use wet water for landscape irrigation to reduce demand for city water. 14 3-83 Issues and Supporting Informat. Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation Issues mitigation Impact g Incorporated CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The project's estimated water demand is very low— approximately 2 acre-foot per year. Compliance with Water Allocation regulations will ensure water supply availability. 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 CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no aesthetic impacts. Further development of the site to be annexed will be subject to architectural review and approval to ensure against negative aesthetic impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? x b) Disturb archaeological resources? 15 x c) Affect historical resources? x d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which x would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the x potential impact area? CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no impact on cultural resources. A Phase 1 Archaeological Survey prepared by Thor Conway indicates there is no evidence of archaeological resource on site. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks x or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? x Not applicable. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the x 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, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Based on information in the application, a field inspection, and a review of relevant references in the Department, staff has determined that there is no evidencebefore the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends The Archaeological survey prepared for this site indicates there is no evidence of historical or archaeologica resources on site. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- x term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals_? Short-term and long-term goals are the same. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually x limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection 15 3-84 Issues and Supporting Informat., . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Issues unless Impact mitigation Incorporated with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) The annexation will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the environment. Compliance with adopted policies and regulations related to growth management and resource availability will help t minimize any cumulative impacts related to site development. Mitigation is recommended to reduce cumulative impacts on air quality and energy consumption to a less than significant level. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will x cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? There are no known significant hazards associated with annexation. Mitigation is recommended to reduce t a less than significant level the potential for human beings to be exposed to unsafe soil contamination as result of oil leaks in Unocal's transmission lines which run down Tank Farm Road. 16 3-85 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one c more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (: (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. NA 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. NA c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describ. the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent t which they address site-specific conditions of the project. NA Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff V. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990). 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan: Land Use, Circulation, Noise, Energy, Open Space, Seismic Safety, Water and Wastewater Management Elements 2. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 3. Groundwater Monitoring Results, Third Quarter, September, 1999, Tank Farm Road Pipeline, San Luis Obispo, CA, prepared for Unocal Corp. by Earth Systems Consultants 4. Health Risk Assessment and health and Safety Plan addressing the Tank Farm Road Pipeline, prepared by England and Associates, 1996 and 1997, Project #'s 147-H and 147-1 5. County of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo Area Plan, January 1997 6. City of San Luis Obispo Source Reduction and Recycling Element 7. 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County 8. SLO County Airport Land Use Plan 9. Soils Engineering Report for the A & R Welding Company prepared by Buena Engineers, Inc. Job No. B-16606-SL1. September, 1986 10. City of San Luis Obispo Informational Map Atlas 11. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990 12. Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation 13. City Department Comments 14. Brown and Caldwell Site Investigation Report for Tank Farm Properties, August 16, 1996 15. Phase I Archaeological Survey of the A&R Welding Property, 205 Tank Farm Road, prepared by Thor Conway, December 1999 ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity map Site location map showing all three annexations General Plan designations map City zoning map 3-86 Project description Soil contamination map Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation City Department Comments 19. MMGATION MEASURES/MONITORING PROGRAM Soil Mitigation Measures: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be Contamin- recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to final ation annexation. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submittedto the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without the requirement for compliance with recommendations in the health and risk assessments. Solid Mitigation Measure: 4. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for Waste recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, Capacity wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 5. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without compliance with this mitigation measure. Energy Mitigation Measure: 6. New buildings constructed on this site shall incorporate the following Conserva- as feasible: tion • Skylights to maximize natural day lighting. • Operable windows to maximize natural ventilation. • Energy-efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shall document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. Air Mitigation Measure: 7. The project shall include: Quality 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; and • extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. 18 3-87 Project description Soil contamination map Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation City Department Comments 19. MITIGATION MEASURES/MONITORING PROGRAM Soil Mitigation Measures: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be Contamin- recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to final ation annexation. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without the requirement for compliance with recommendations in the health and risk assessments. Solid Mitigation Measure: 3. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for Waste recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, Capacity wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 4. Existing and future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. A description of current recycling efforts and any plans to expand those efforts shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to City Council review of the annexation request. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without compliance with this mitigation measure. Energy Mitigation Measure: 6. New buildings constructed on this site shall incorporate the following Conserva- as feasible: tion skylights to maximize natural day lighting; • operable windows to maximize natural ventilation; and • energy-efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shall document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. Air Mitigation Measure: 7. The project shall include: Quality • 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; and • -extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. 3-88 _ N I YZ 7' Gzi _ - \ '- � �• ±'� ;,^ LOLL-]II _c I - - _ ZT - dnI %ty W,p N 205 TANK FAPA . 0 2OOAW6W F� R 188-99 A 3-89 MARGARITA AREA Z. _fHIGUERA -:1 0JM ERCE T MERCE L- _4 PARK . ..... ... =7 ---------- -Sw.PAC- U %\X NI Weldin _g= N N X �:A WJL �,M Iiiii,Mips 001,M,7-M" RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE: A large area for the development of a Land to remain open for the protection, variety of housing types along with use,and enjoyment of natural resources. supporting uses such as parks,elemen- While they are not shown on this map, tary schools,and convenience shopping. all creeks are within this category. GOVERNMENT FACILITIES: 19 SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING: Business services,wholesaling and sales of large items,and light manufacturing. (Note:see policies for airport area) RECREATION: BUSINESS PARK— Publicly or privately owned recreation An area to be kept in low intensity uses facilities,either outdoors or buildings in until developed as a campus-like setting a park setting. under a master plan. CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED City of San Luis Obispo ANNEXATION AREAS General Plan Designations ASSOCIATE S 980115/3 Exhibits.pm65 12/1/99 3-90 C-S C-S-S { C-S-SP to M-SP Farm Supply ED (Prezone C-S) �,R2S � VOS-20 i A&R Welding (Prezone Com) R-1 IC-S PacBell (Prezone M) I R-1-PD JE 'M R-2-PD C-S s c� 'n i C• 6 g'`3 ♦�i�City Limit Line Urban Reserve Line 200 D 200 400 Feet Concurrently Proposed EXIStInG and pROpOSEo Annexation Areas zonmG dESIC�natlons 50 0 50 103 .0 1n{f/��JnI • p ��-� I W 1J b a Z Z Q x z it o CL oa f ' Q O ] • < a Q O x \ E-4 mU CO � U O nn IL0 CL VO ¢fin U 4y a UN X X X- 0� H O W J mQ 0 x x '-X-x Y c , Q �Q77 x I � � Zy Uy LS GOO W ~ � ZO -xr E4 -1 ' J Q ao Ul v < < n� O N N cV s I m 00 a g o ^ xT—x x �j o I=n11 i i j x J } u 7J x O�i -XTx—�� O C J i a ll J I I �7' 0 r0 X c x x X Doc FO~ = o\ • Sa Fm F 50 4s O Z O cc <? C f a 0 0 0W❑ 01 o e oe —X 3 / a 1 DD C a!A&Associates PROJECT DESCRIPTION FOR TANK FARM INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX SITE: The proposed project is located at 205 Tank Farm Road in the County of San Luis Obispo. The proposed project site is adjacent to the City limits of the City of San Luis Obispo. The project site is a flat ±2.9 acre parcel with three existing buildings. The existing buildings square footage total ±11,000sq.ft. The proposed commercial building shall be ±23,000sq.ft. Lot coverage shall be ± 27% of the total site for the existing and proposed buildings. LANDSCAPING: Other than a row of pine trees on the eastern property line and the existing landscaping in front of the existing buildings the site is void of planting. The total proposed landscaping for the project would be ±8,000sq. ft. USES: The applicant proposes that the uses for the new commercial building will be the allowed uses as defined in the Land Use Chapter of the Airport Area Specific Plan. The hours of operation will most likely be between 7AM and 7PM Monday through Saturday. The total number of employees proposed for the existing and proposed buildings is unknown at this time. Based on 1/400, (spaces per building square feet) ratio. The total number of parking spaces proposed are 74 spaces, this is 16 spaces more than is required for the proposed use. ARCHITECTURE: The proposed building will be a metal building systems structure that will match the existing buildings on the site. The colors, materials and proportions will be identical to the existing buildings. The main facade will be scaled to a more "human scale" relative to the rear portion of the structure. The front portion will be for office space while the rear will be for manufacturing type uses. Please refer to color board provided with this letter. GRADING AND DRAINAGE: The Project site has been previously graded so that there is an elevation change of 3 feet from front to back. The project site will require fill material to raise the building and parking pad to an elevation that will match the existing adjacent surfaces. The amount of fill has not been determined at this time, but a rough estimate of 1 ,000 cubic yards should be dose. The site historically has drained to the southeast corner of the site. The drainage for the proposed development will continue to drain to the southeast corner. Engineering will be provided to design the grading, detention/retention and flow rates that will meet the City of San Luis Obispo engineering requirements. UTILITIES: After the proposed project is annexed into the City all City utility services shall be provide by the City of San Luis Obispo including water, sewer, and fire. All connections shall be per City standards. Archttecture.Plammne&Crapbics 3450 Broad Street—Suite 106 San G+is Obispo,CA 93401 3-93 (805) 541-5604 Fax(805)5414371 r TT -f ZE $ a i � so ft: �• ..�4 F SfiF�;• Y�.� �r9 Z __ - � e ='r d =:iar cI- Y/ ESl ri + Sf ° :9$ fY Se aD k e 7 `ia 'e �r = e a Z cprm ® i 9 C (n D arm c0 > y mom eMO � s a :$s N m m a^ 5 a c m g ON i .01 o F . ryy B s oe r3 F• Strom D.Pultb/LIA..dArmriate n O r D vj s i r a r 2 r � s ' TANK FARM ROAD . . I --. •e•v[r•[ [nn� Igl 4 I . I`_{I ��II . .I. I. . I a I I 7 LJ t I. .I Q -- :- 'U C O. AMR- 1 8 < 11 n ✓ • t[ I � C T f ti i �I•I ' - � a •_._________ ------------------------------ i I w I I >L I4 R 7I •�•fP T-[ M1[' n o o z Ow2 •I.��I�JI s!�4 III rtjtl sp lie! i i 8� , '� � r i j iii;ij I Sworn D.Pnit4 NA..dArmava[ I _ I,m y r r\ e N ME Ism ME H� �- _� OR JIM low INp���„pII�I II Imo_ _ Ira ME 3 = 1M= m Is WE Is 10,12ME fm ME ME H ==_ i X_ 6N TANK FARM ROAD 'VFv\ •s•vet•[ swr Ali or Or- till t O 1 1 �7 �e 9G b} 1 1 1� P � Y m II IE'RfrE M)f -_ ? F imp v < � i °o I r D iZ I 1 i --- ---- --a u_.........---v x-----...----x 1 n I I I I m I I a9 c0 m ap I rr}G-- - --— 0 A i 00 3 . a it s qui _ p a, o o? sync i1 a>>�4'1� F� , $ bY60` XDpsia 'ii' iII yi Eft 1 I C pn v a•��F! i i i go 006 Steam D.Pula,AJA..6A=ciw= I .� IIlI IIIII city of sAn WIS OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 June 21, 1999 David Erbstoesser A&R Welding Supply 205 Tank Faun Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: A&R Welding Annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo Dear Dave: You have requested information concerning fees and conditions that would be applicable in the event the A&R Welding property were annexed to the City of San Luis Obispo. Provided below is City Staff's best estimate of costs based on the City Council adopted Interim Annexation Policy, and development fee schedules effective July 1, 1999. Additional fee increases recently adopted by the City Council will become effective August 15, 1999. Annexation and development applications received as complete for processing by the City prior to that time will be charged at the current rates, even though they may not be finally acted upon until after the increased rates go into effect.. The Interim Annexation Policy was adopted by Council for use prior to adoption of an Airport Area Specific Plan, and possible City initiated annexations in that vicinity. It is intended to accommodate applicants who have immediate development needs, and would otherwise be required to develop under County jurisdiction with a potential for redundant (and possibly unnecessary) costs for lesser service. BACKGROUND A&R Welding Supply distributes various gasses, other materials and equipment to a variety of individuals and companies which provide welding services in the San Luis County area. You currently occupy approximately 49,750 square feet (1.14 acre) of a 126,555 square foot (2.9 acre) site (leaving 1.76 acres undeveloped) on the south side of Tank Farm Road about 700 feet east of Long Street. Three existing buildings total approximately 11,000 square feet of floor area, with an anticipated new industrial building of approximately 23,309 square feet in area to be occupied by others. The remainder of the site is and will continue to be developed with required parking and circulation area, and site amenities such as landscaping. Two driveway entrances (one currently existing) off the 295 foot Tank Farm Road frontage are proposed. © The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and a�C99 Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Page 2. Your site is separated from the existing City Boundary by land owned by Pacific Bell Telephone Company. That property must be annexed at the same time,or prior to, your property to provide the required contiguous boundary with the incorporated area. Our communication to date with representatives of the telephone company indicate an interest on their part to participate in a joint annexation. IMPACT FEES Utilities: Water: At the time of development you must create a water allocation based upon the proposed use, and pay an impact fee. At the present time the allocation would be developed through retrofitting existing water-using facilities in the City. The cost of retrofitting is credited up to $150 per bathroom retrofitted against the water impact fee. For commercial properties the impact fee is based on the size of the water meter required to provide the amount of water service needed, and is subject to several variables. For example, you may choose to use your existing well water for landscape irrigation purposes, and thus reduce your required allocation and commodity charge (monthly water bill). A dual system such as this will require prior approval of an agreement between A&R Welding and the City. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any property where a connection to the City water system is established in conjunction with continued use of an on-site well. A&R Welding would be responsible for paying all costs associated with design and construction to extend the public water main in Tank Farm Road at its full planned size (12" in this case, as dictated by fire flow requirements) to your easterly property line, and installing necessary fire hydrants and services along your frontage. At your request City regulations provide for reimbursement to you (through the City) for other properties making direct service connections to the line in the future. The existing developed portion of your property could continue to rely on the existing private well after annexation until you desire to .connect to the City system, or the system failed. Connection to the City's water system for fire protection purposes only would not, in and of itself, require a water allocation, but would be subject to a small monthly access charge. Wastewater: A&R Welding would be required to pay the design and construction costs for extending the existing 8-inch sewer main in Tank Farm Road to your easterly property line in conjunction with the water main noted above. Reimbursement from future new direct (lateral) connections would also be applicable. 3-100 Page 3. A wastewater impact fee will be required upon connection to the City's sewer system, and is determined by the size of the water meter installed. Under current City policy, the septic system serving the existing buildings on your site could continue to be used until it failed, or needed to be replaced for other reasons. Any new construction would be required to connect to the City sewer system. Examples of fees are: Water Impact fee, 1"meter $13,296 Wastewater Impact fee, 1"meter $ 5,478 Creekside/Silver City and Laguna lift stations fee ($158.07 per acre x 1.76 acres) -$ 278 TRANSPORTATION Existing development at the time of annexation is not subject to transportation impact fees. An impact fee will be applicable to any new structures, or the expansion of existing structures, which require building permits in the City. For your anticipated new building project that would amount to: Service Commercial uses (23,309 sq. ft. @ $1.468 per sq. ft.) $34,218 PROCESSING FEES Annexation $ 3,520 Prezoning $ 2,019 Environmental Review $ 679 Public Works Plan Check and Inspection Fees would be assessed at the following rates for water and sewer main extensions, Tank Farm road improvements, and similar infrastructure improvements: Improvement Plan Check: $299 plus 1.5% of construction costs Construction Inspection: $1,422 plus 6.1% of construction costs Additional fees such as architectural review, building plan check and construction inspection would be charged after annexation in conjunction with processing approvals for the new structures. Representative fees (based on a service commercial shell structure) would be: Architectural Review $ 744 Building Plan Check Fees $ 7,892 3-101 Page 4. Construction Permit Fees $ 7,779 Fire Safety Surcharge and water meter installation $ 1,296 Affordable Housing $17,016 OPEN SPACE FEE The City's General Plan requires development in the Airport Area to contribute to the acquisition of open space. The Interim Policy establishes a fee of$2,500 per underdeveloped acre at the time of annexation, or dedication of "equivalent credible acreage" as determined by the City's Natural Resources Manager. 1.76 acres @ $2,500 per acre $ 4,400 DEFERRED AREA-WIDE IMPACT FEE This fee represents the undeveloped portion of your properties share of area-wide infrastructure for the buildout of the airport area, such as major roads, trunk water and sewer improvements, and storm drain improvements, that are beyond those associated with the direct extension of service to your property. The fee also includes a proportionate contribution toward the preparation of the Airport Area Specific Plan. This fee is due prior to final Council action on the annexation, and must be paid in full or guaranteed by an acceptable letter of credit with a minimum term of five (5) years. Within that five year period the surety may be retired by payment in full at any time prior to Council adoption of a fee ordinance replacing the interim policy. If construction of area-wide infrastructure is not commenced within five years of completion of your construction, the surety would be canceled. If, however, these costs are recovered through a future assessment district, the City also requires that you agree to either vote affirmatively for the formation of the district or pay your proportional costs in full. 1.76 acres @ $15,535 per acre $ 27,347 OTHER ISSUES Following the completion of annexation, evaluation of any new construction on A&R Welding property will include consideration of general improvement needs in the vicinity, and could result in conditions of approval for the new construction. Example of such considerations include: Construction to complete curb, gutter and sidewalk with associated street paveout and traffic striping, and any necessary 3-102 Page 5. drainage facilities along the Tank Farm Road frontage. Installation of street lights as necessary, and planting of street trees at the rate of one tree per 35 feet of street frontage, will also be required. Provision as necessary of detailed hydraulic and hydrologic analyses to establish 100 year storm flooding depths/elevations to assure that new structures or building pads are at least one foot above those elevations in accordance with City and Federal Flood Plain Management Policies. Important Note: The above estimated costs relate only to the costs associated with the annexation and development of the A&R Welding property in the City of San Luis Obispo. Other charges, such as the San Luis Coastal Unified School District development fee, or "cost of doing business" items such as municipally assessed taxes, are matters to be estimated by you. Two revenue sources where we know there are differences between the City and the County are Business, and Utility Users Taxes. If you need information to assist you with estimates for these last two items, please contact Linda Asprion, Revenue Manager at 781-7126. ANNEXATION COST SUMMARY Our best estimate of costs which you can expect at the time of annexation would be: Processing Fees $ 6,218 Open Space Fee $ 4,400 Deferred Area-Wide Impact Fee(security) $27,347 As indicated above, there will be additional processing fees and improvement costs associate with further development of the A&R Welding property once annexation is completed. These will be consistent with similar charges assessed any other property within the City upon development, and are not established by the annexation process. If you have any other questions regarding the information presented above, or other aspects of annexation to the city, please let me know. Sin ply, 1 � Arnold B. Jonas Community Development Director c: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer 3-103 Fire Prevention Bureau Memorandum To: Whitney Mcfivain From: Darren Drake, Fire Marshal Date: December 2, 1999 Re: 205 Tank Farm Rd.—Tank Farm Industrial Complex 'Fire Department Access: Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the Califomia Fire Code. Access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. Access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of a 60,000 pound fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. "Water Supplies: Water supplies shall be in accordance with Sections 901 and 903 of the California Fire Code. An approved water supply connected to the City distribution system and capable of providing the required fire flow for fire protection is required. The fire flow shall be determining using Appendix III-A of the California Fire Code. 'Fire Hydrants: Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the California Fire Code. The location, number and type of hydrants connected to the City system shall be determined using Appendix III-B of the California Fire Code and the approved City Engineering Standards. Fire Protection Systems and Equipment: Fire protection systems shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code and California Building Code as amended by the City. Fire Safety During Construction: Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Article 87 of the Califomia Fire Code. Environmental Assessment: This proposed property and development is in close proximity to underground oil pipelines and areas that have had a history of contamination. It is recommended that all development within Unocal's Tank Farm Pipeline comply with the following: 3-104 1. Require a deed notification with reference to the potential or actual area contamination. 2. Require owners, developers, and contractors within the area to obtain a copy of a basic notification document prepared by England & Associates for Unocal. The document is entitled: Health and Safety Plan Crude Oil, Hazard and Material Handling Tank Farm Road Pipeline Leak Site San Luis Obispo, California Project No. 147-1 3. In the event contamination is confirmed a site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted and approved prior to allowing any structures to be located over or adjacent to contaminated areas. Miscellaneous: Prior to annexation a facility fire and life-safety inspection shall be conducted at A&R Welding and a technical report provided to the City Fre Department. The report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer, specialist or other person acceptable to the Chief and the owner and shall analyze the fire and life-safety properties of the facilities and operations. Note: Items with an asterisk apply to the new and existing facilities. •Page 2 3-105 Public Works The following comments are to be applied generally to all three annexations (Application #'s 206-99, 188-99 & 213-99: The processing of the three adjacent annexations at the same time presents an issue regarding the inclusion of Tank Farm Road (TFR). Since it cannot be guaranteed that all three annexations will be completed at the same time, each annexation (Application#'s 206-99, 188-99 & 213-99) must include all of TFR right of way between the existing City Limits and each respective annexation. This will insure that if one annexation is not completed, or delayed, the annexation of TFR will be continuous and without "gaps" remaining under County jurisdiction. There are no annexation conditions recommended. However, further development of the property brings the following issues to be addressed upon receipt of a formal development application: 1. Drainage and detention basins will need to be incorporated into project plans and must comply with the Airport Area Drainage Report criteria. (A previous drainage study in this area was completed by Cannon & Assoc. and may include a portion of the subject properties). 2. Site access limitations from TFR. 3. Improvement of Tank Farm Road will include a combination of detached and integral sidewalks with a landscaped parkway, curb & gutter, street pavement, raised median island (as required to control traffic movements), fire hydrants, street lighting, etc., per the City and County adopted master plan. 4. Extension of City water and sewer mains (and services) will need to be included in the project, to the satisfaction of the City Utilities & Public Works Director. 5. If the property includes existing wells (active or inactive) that are to remain, all water services to the site (including fire lines) will need to be fitted with appropriate USC approved backflow devices. 3-106 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY �k.. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING VICTOR HOLANDA, AICP DIRECTOR BRYCE TINGLE, AICP ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ELLEN CARROLL ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR BARNEY MCCAY CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL January 25, 2000 PATRICK BRUN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE OFFICER Community Development Dept./Whitney Mcllvaine City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93041 SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PERMIT NO. 188-99 - ERBSTOESSER (ANNEXATION) Thank you for referring the above project to the Airport Land Use Commission. The proposed annexation is compatible with the San Luis Obispo County Airport's Land Use Plan (ALUP), and the proposed commercial project (with new "shell building") is conditionally approvable. On January 19, 2000, the Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the application, and recommends that the City approve the project with the conditions in the attached report (including Condition No. 3 prohibiting churches). Please call me if you have questions or comments (781-5701). Sincerely Ted Bench Airport Land Use Commission COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN . LUIS OBISPO • CALIFORNIA 93408 • (805)781-560 -100-834-4636 EMAIL: ipcoping@slonet.org - FAX: (805)781-1242 • WEBSITE: http://www.slonet.org/vv/ipcopIng FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATION ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY ER 206-99 3-108 III city . of sAn luis oBispomaze 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ER 206-99 1 . Project Title: Farm Supply Annexation, Annx / R / ER 206-99 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: Associate Planner Whitney Mclivaine, 781-7164 4. Project Location: 204 Tank Farm Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Jim Brabeck, Farm Supply Company, P.O. Box , Room 1 N0501, San Ramon, CA 94583 6. General Plan Designation: Services and Manufacturing 7. Current County Zoning: Commercial Service 8. Description of the Project: The applicant is requesting annexation of roughly 4.7 acres of property on the north side of Tank Farm Road. The area to be annexed is an undeveloped agricultural field. The development plan submitted with the application shows a proposal for 32,000 square feet of building area. and a nursery. 9. Entitlements Requested: Annexation, Prezoning, and Architectural Review 10. Surrounding Land Uses: Agriculture and other service-commercial and manufacturing operations. 11 . Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Local Agency Formation Commission OThe City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and JAM Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. 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. X Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing X Energy and Mineral Cultural Resources Resources Geological Problems X Hazards Recreation Water Noise X Mandatory Findings of Significance X Air Quality Public Services Transportation and Utilities and Service Circulation Systems There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project . qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ther will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures describedon an X attached sheets have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project May have a significant effect on the environment, and 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 theearlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or is "Potentially 2 3-110 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, there 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 imposed upon the proposed project. j January 28, 2000 gn ure Date Ronald Whisenand, Development Review Manager Arnold Jonas, Community Development Dir. Printed Name For 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 the tiering, program EIR, or other CEO. 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. 3 3-111 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation' Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 1,2, x 5,6, b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies 8, x adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? 12, 13 c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 1,2 x d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impac . 1, 10 x to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible lanc uses? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of ar x established community (including a low-income o minority community)? _T Zonin The City's general plan applies a designation of Services and Manufacturing to this site. To be consisten with this land use designation the site must be zoned either Service-Commercial (C-S) or Manufacturing (M). The draft Airport Area Specific Plan indicates that Service-Commercial would be the most appropriate zoning. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Consistency with general plan polices and zoning regulations is best achieved by prezoning the subject property C-S, Service-Commercial. Agricultural Compatibility CONCLUSION: Less than significant. There are agricultural fields to the north and east of the site. The development plan shows a storage yard, barn storage, and parking along the north and eastern sides of the project site, which should act as effective buffers between farming operations and retail activities. Because this project is site development for a farm supply store, it is not likely to conflict with adjacent agricultural operations. Airport Compatibility On the City general plan land use map and in Figure 9 (Airport Area map) of the Land Use Element, the site is included within the boundaries of the Airport Area. The project site is located in Airport Land Use Area as shown in the Airport Land Use Plan. The proposed administrative offices are a conditionally approvable use in Airport Land Use Area 3 and the warehouse and storage areas are designated compatible. Th proposed development of the project site was reviewed and approved by the Airport Land Use Commissio on January 19, 2000. Site development will be subject to any ALUC conditions of approval. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will not impact airport operations. Site development will be subject to Airport Land Use Commission conditions of approval. Land Use Element Policies Ultimately this site is envisioned by both City and County land use plans to be annexed to the City. It is the policy of City Council to process interim annexations in the airport area while simultaneously working toward the goal of preparing a specific plan for this area. Governing Policies: 4 3-112 Issues and Supporting Informat. Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Supply Annexation Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Su P mitigation Incorporated ♦ 1.8.1 Agricultural Protection It is the City's policy to encourage preservation of economically viable agricultural operations and Ian within the urban reserve and city limits. The City should provide for the continuation of farming through steps such as provision of appropriate general plan designations and zoning. ♦ 1.8.2 Prime Agricultural Land Development of prime agricultural land may be permitted, if the development contributes to the protection of agricultural land in the urban reserve or greenbelt by one or more of the followin methods, or an equally effective method: acting as a receiver site for transfer of development credi from prime agricultural land of equal quantity; securing for the City or for a suitable land conservatio organization open space easements or fee ownership with deed restrictions; helping to directly fund th acquisition of fee ownership or open space easements by the City or a suitable land conservatio organization. Development of small parcels which are essentially surrounded by urbanization need no contribute to agricultural land protection. The Soil Conservation Service map shows Class III soils on this site. The Land Use Element defines prime agricultural soils as Class I and II soils. Soils on this site are therefore not considered prime. In addition, the significance of this conversion was addressed as part of the Land Use Element EIR and determined by Cit Council to be an appropriate change in land use. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The project site is zoned for commercial service uses in the County. The project will not affect prime Class I and II soils. • 7.2 Airport Land Use Plan Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Site development is subject to the Airport Land Use Commission conditions of approval. • 7.4 Greenbelt Protection Annexation of the Airport Area, whether it occurs as one action or several, shall be consistent with the growth management objectives of maintaining areas outside the urban reserve line in rural, predominantly open space uses. An Airport Area annexation shall not take effect unless the annexe area helps protect an appropriate part of the greenbelt near the Airport Area, through one or more of the following methods: A. Dedicating an open-space easement or fee ownership to the City or to a responsible land conservation organization. B. Paying fees to the City in-lieu of dedication, which shall be used within a reasonable time to secure greenbelt open space near the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The applicant has two alternatives in meeting this policy requirement: payment of in-lieu fees or dedicating an open space easement or fee ownership for land in the southern parl of the City's greenbelt. The applicant is proposing the payment of an in-lieu fee consistent with the rat established by the Council as part of the Interim Annexation Policy. 5 3-113 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation PP Y mitigation Incorporated ♦ 7.5 Internal Open Space The areas designated for urban uses, but not necessarily each parcel, should include open areas as sit amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Open Space Element. In addition, wildlife corridors across the Airport Area shall be identified and preserved. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The Open Space Element does not identify any site specific amenities. ♦ 7.7 Transit Service Transit service linking development sites with the citywide bus system should be provided concurrent with any additional urban development in the Airport Area. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The need for additional transit facilities will be reviewed as more properties along Tank Farm Road build out. The short term transit plan does not call for transit service along Tank Farm Road. ♦ 7.8 Specific Plan The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainage within the Airport Area. The City Council has directed the preparation of a Specific Plan for the Airport Area. The plan preparation review, and approval process is expected is take approximately two years to complete. The applicant i willing to contribute a pro-rated share of the cost of specific plan preparation. CONCLUSION: Not significant. The project will further the goal of specific plan preparation by contributing a portion of the estimated preparation cost. ♦ 7.14 Open Space Dedication and In-lieu Fees In approving development proposals, the City will assure that Airport Area properties secure protectio for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open space protection for any contiguous, commonly owned Ian outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu o dedication shall be paid when the property is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area soul of the City's urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of open space dedication. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. See discussion under policies 7.4 and 7.5. ♦ 1.13 Annexation and Services ♦ 1.13.1 Water & Sewer Service The City shall not provide nor permit delivery of City water or sewer services to the following areas. However, the City will serve those parties having valid previous connections or contracts with the City. A. Outside the City limits; B. Outside the urban reserve line; C. Above elevations reliably served by gravity-flow in the City water system; D. Below elevations reliably served by gravity-flow or pumps in the City sewer system. 6 3-114 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less ThanNo Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation Issues Unless Impact PP Y mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation into the City will ensure compliance with this policy. In addition, the property is located inside the City's urban reserve line. The project's estimated water demand is very low - approximately 2.69 acre-feet per year. Compliance with Water Allocation regulations will ensure water supply availability. See discussion under Utilities below. ♦ 1.13.2 Annexation Purpose and Timing Annexation should be used as a growth management tool, both to enable appropriate urba development and to protect open space. Areas within the urban reserve line which are to be develope with urban uses should be annexed before urban development occurs. The City may annex an are long before such development is to occur, and the City may annex areas which are to remain permanently as open space. An area may be annexed in phases, consistent with the city-approve specific plan or development plan for the area. Phasing of annexation and development will reflec topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed Ian uses and roads. The property would be annexed prior to urban development. Topography poses no issue since the site i essentially flat. Needed capital facilities and funding are outlined in the attached letter from the Communit Development Director to the applicant. The pre-annexation agreement states that property owners and thei successors will agree to support formation of an assessment district if that is the approach adopted by the City for funding the specific plan and infrastructure improvements. Frontage improvements will be require as part of site development. The property owner wishes to connect to the City's sewer and water service. The proposed land use - indoor and outdoor retail sales of building materials, hardware, and gardening supplies - is consistent with the general plan land use designation of Services and Manufacturing. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Urban development and annexation of this site are envisioned in both Cit and County land use plans. ♦ 1.13.3 Required Plans Land in any of the following annexation areas may be developed only after the City has adopted a pla for land uses, roads, utilities, the overall pattern of subdivision, and financing of public facilities for the area. The plan shall provide for open space protection consistent with policy 1.13.5. A. For the Airport area, a specific plan shall be adopted for the whole area. Until a specific plan i adopted, properties may only be annexed if they meet the following criteria: 1. The property is contiguous to existing city limits; and 2. The property is within the existing urban reserve line; and 3. The property is located near to existing infrastructure; and 4. Existing infrastructure capacity is available to serve the proposed development; and 5. A development plan for the property belonging to the applicant(s) accompanies the application fo annexation; and 6. The applicant agrees to contribute to the cost of preparing the specific plan and constructing area wide infrastructure improvements according to a cost-sharing plan maintained by the City. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. A specific plan for the Airport Area is not yet complete. The applicant's request is consistent with the interim annexation criteria listed above. The applicant's compliance with th interim plan will be guaranteed through a formal written agreement between the applicant and the City. 3-115 Issues and Supporting Informat.. ., Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation PP Y mitigation Incorporated • 1.13.4 Development and Services Actual development in an annexed area may be approved only when adequate City services can b provided for that development, without reducing the level of services or increasing the cost of service for existing development and for build-out within the City limits as of July 1994, in accordance with the City's water management policies. The water management policies may allow part of the water retrofit credit that would be needed for build-out within the 1994 city limits to be used for annexation projects. Water for development in an annexed area may be made available by any one or any combination of th following: A. City water supply, including reclaimed water; B. Reducing usage of City water in existing development so that there will be no net increase in long- term water usage; C. Private well water, but only as an interim source, pending availability of an approved addition to Cit water sources, and when it is demonstrated that use of the well water will not diminish the City's municipal groundwater supply. The applicant plans to extend city water and sewer lines and connect to these city services. To connect t city water, the applicant must develop a water allocation, consistent with the City's Water Allocation Regulations, which require applicants to retrofit existing plumbing fixtures throughout the city to save twit as much water as the project is anticipated to use. The applicant is proposing to use an on-site well for landscaping irrigation. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Connection to city water and any future site development under the jurisdiction of the City will be subject to the City's water allocation regulations. See discussion under Utilities below. • 1.13.5 Open Space Each annexation shall help secure permanent protection for areas designated Open Space, and for th habitat types and wildlife corridors within the annexation area that are identified in policy 6.1.1. Policies concerning prime agricultural land shall apply when appropriate. The following standards shall apply t the indicated areas: D. Airport Area properties shall secure protection for any on-site resources as identified in the Open Space Element. These properties, to help maintain the greenbelt, shall also secure open spat protection for any contiguous, commonly owned land outside the urban reserve. If it is not feasible to directly obtain protection for such land, fees in lieu of dedication shall be paid when the propert is developed, to help secure the greenbelt in the area south of the City's southerly urban reserve line CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Site specific resources identified in the Open Space Element are the Unocal wetlands, which do not extend onto the project site. See discussion under Land Use Policies 7.4 an 7.5. • 1.14 Costs of Growth The costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City will adopt a development-fee program and other appropriate financing measures, so that new development pays its share of the costs of new services and facilities needed to serve it. 8 3-116 Issues and Supporting Informat,- . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation issues unless Impact PP Y mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Anticipated infrastructure needs for future development are outlined i comments from the City's Public Works Department and in the letter from the Director regarding annexation. The applicant has agreed to payment of anticipated infrastructure costs in the Airport Area consistent with the Interim Airport Area Annexation Policy. Project specific infrastructure needs will be addressed with architectural review of site development. ♦ 1.15 Solid Waste Capacity In addition to other requirements for adequate resources and services prior to development, the Cit must determine that adequate solid waste disposal capacity will be available before granting an discretionary land use approval which would increase solid waste generation. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. Solid waste from this site is delivered to Cold Canyon landfill, which has a capacity to accept solid waste for approximately 18.5 years, based on the current rate of disposal an ongoing trends showing a reduction in per capita waste generation. Measures to reduce solid waste are stil needed to improve compliance with the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per person per year. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach it capacity in the year 2018. The act requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow o materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. As of 1998 (the date for which latest figures are available), San Luis Obispo had reduced its waste stream by 34%. To help reduce waste generated by future site development, a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded demolition and construction materials should be submitted with the building permit application Convenient facilities for onsite recycling should be included in the design of future development. Mitigation Measures: Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan for recycling discarded building materials such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted fo approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. Future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local populatior 1 x projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly o x indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable x housing? The Land Use Element (LUE) growth management provisions (section 1.0 of the LUE) call for limitations o the number of residences that may be built every year, to maintain an average growth rateof one percent per year during the 1990s. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will not impact population. Job creation is not a significant issue in this case since the project involves relocation of an existing local business. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? T x 9 3-117 Issues and Supporting Informat,_ . Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation PP Y mitigation Incorporated b) Seismic ground shaking? 1 x c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 x d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? x e) Landslides or mudflows? 1 x f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil 1 x conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? 9 x h) Expansive soils? 9 x i) Unique geologic or physical features? 10 x There are no known faults on site or in the immediate vicinity. The site is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California, and strong ground shaking should be expected during the life of on-sit structures. Any structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the Uniform Building Code. Soils Engineering Reports prepared for the properties in this vicinity- the adjacent A&R Welding site in particular - indicate no likelihood of liquefaction or subsidence, but also note that expansive soils are present in this area. The site is essentially flat with no unique geologic or physical features. A soils engineering report specific to this site will be required with any application for site development. CONCLUSION: Not significant. There are no known geological or soils conditions that would make this site unsuitable for development. New buildings will be designed in accordance with a site specific soils report. 4. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the 1, 13 x rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards x such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of x surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water x body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water x movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either througl x direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception 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 x otherwise available for public water supplies? Site development of the vacant agricultural field will increase storm water runoff. Comments from the Public Works Department indicate that drainage and detention basins will need to be incorporated into the projec plans and must comply with criteria in the City and Airport Area Drainage Report prepared by Cannon an Associates. The applicant may opt to use a well for landscape irrigation purposes. If so that estimated water use would be roughly 0.5 acre-feet per year. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. On site detention facilities will be included in site development plans to 10 3-118 Issues and Supporting Informat.— Sources Sources Potent, Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation ' Incorporated the satisfaction of the Public Works Director prior to issuance of building permits. Well water, if used, would only be for landscaping. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an 7 x existing or projected air quality violation (Compliance with APCD Environmental Guidelines)? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants x c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause x any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? x Short-tens Impacts During project construction, there will be increased levels of fugitive dust associated with construction an grading activities, as well as construction emissions associated with heavy duty construction equipment Compliance with the dust management practices contained in Municipal Code Section 15.04.040 X. (Sec 3307.2) will adequately mitigate short-term impacts. No further mitigation is necessary. Long-Term Impacts San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State ozone and PM10 (fine particulate matter 1 microns or less in diameter) air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non-attainment pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. Th. 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County was developed and adopted by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to meet that requirement. The CAP is a comprehensive planning document designed to reduce emissions from traditional industrial and commercial sources, as well as from motor vehicle use. Land Use Element Policy 1.18.2 states that the City will help the APCD implement the Clean Air Plan. Motor vehicles account for about 40% of the precursor emissions responsible for ozone formation, and are also a significant source of PM70. Thus, a major requirement in the CAP is the implementation of transportation control measures designed to reduce motor vehicle trips and miles traveled by local residents The APCD recommends that site development include the following mitigation measures to encourage transportation alternatives to the single occupant vehicle and make the project attractive to bicyclists an pedestrians. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. Annexation and prezoning pose no threat to air quality. Site development will impact air quality as a result of construction activity and traffic generated by use established. Standard mitigation is recommended to reduce impacts resulting from construction activity an future site development. Mitigation Measure: 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; and • extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. '' 3-119 Issues and Supporting Informal, .. Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation PP Y mitigation Incorporated 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? x b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp x curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment))? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby x uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 2 x e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 1 x f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative 1 x transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts (e.g. compatibilit} x with San Luis Obispo Co. I T CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will have no impact on traffic. Site development will be subject to the City's traffic impact fees which were established (Resolution No. 8406) to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City's streets, transit, and bikeway facilities. Air traffic compatibility is discussed in Section 1. Required road and frontage improvements are outlined in comments from the Public Works Department. Parking and circulation will be reviewed as part of the architectural review process. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal affect: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats 10, x (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, 16 animals or birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? 10 x c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest 1,10 x coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool? 1,10 x e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 1,10 x CONCLUSION: Not significant. Based on information in the application, a field inspection, and a review o relevant references in the Department, staff has determined that there is no evidence before the Departmen that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 1 x b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 1 x inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral x resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? The Energy Element states that, "New development will be encouraged to minimize the use of conventions energy for space heating and cooling, water heating, and illumination by means of proper design an orientation, including the provision and protection of solar exposure." The City implements energy conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code which establishes en&g conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Buildings proposed as part of this project must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals through architectural review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying o mechanical systems to maintain comfort. 12 3-120 Issues and Supporting Informati. Sources Sources PotentiPotentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation Incorporated CONCLUSION: Potentially significant. To avoid using non-renewable resources in an inefficient manner, the following standard mitigation is recommended: Mitigation Measure: New buildings constructed on this site 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. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shat document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous x substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan x or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health x hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential 3, 4, x health hazards? 13, 14 e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, x grass or trees? Annexation is not anticipated to result in the creation or exposure of people to any known health hazards. Phase I site assessment was prepared for this site by Earth Systems Consultants in January 1997. It indicates that petroleum hydrocarbons are present in the ground water. Prior to issuance of any building o grading permit, the developer/owner must remove all site contamination or clearly define the areas o contamination and justify that such areas pose no threat to human health and/or the environment. The Fir Department recommends that a site assessment be prepared regarding the presence of metals, solvents pesticides, herbicides, asbestos, and fuel hydrocarbons as a result of the site's agricultural use. CONCLUSION: Potentially significant unless mitigated. Soil and water contamination is present on site and could affect site development. Mitigation Measure: 1. A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be recorded to the satisfaction of the Fir Chief prior to any building or grading permit issuance. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted and approved prior to any issuance o building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates fo Unocal (Project No. 147-1) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. 10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? 1 x 13 3-121 Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation Incorporated b) Exposure of people to "unacceptable" noise levels as 1 x defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element? The anticipated use is not a noise-sensitive use as described by the Noise Element of the General Plan. No are there noise-sensitive uses in the vicinity of the project site. CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself has no noise impacts. Affected uses are not noise sensitive. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? 13 x b) Police protection? 13 x c) Schools? x d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 13 x e) Other governmental services? 13 x CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Annexation will not have any impact on public services. Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to accommodate future site development. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? x b) Communications systems? x c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution 13 x facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? 13 x e) Storm water drainage? 13 x f) Solid waste disposal? 6 x g) Local or regional water supplies? 1, 17 x Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications will be necessary to ensure adequate delivery of city services to this site. Utility infrastructure and solid waste disposal are discussed above under Land Use. Storm drainage is discussed under Water. Water Supplv The City of San Luis Obispo obtains its water from a combination of surface and groundwater sources Adopted safe annual yield from these sources is 7,735 acre-feet per year. The City is pursuing the development of additional water supplies, including the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, the Salinas Reservoi Expansion Project, and the Water Reuse Project. Reuse of treated wastewater for non-potable needs, suc as landscape watering, will reduce demand on potable water supplies. This is likely to be the first additiona source developed and is projected to yield roughly 1200 acre-feet per year. Half that amount would be hel in reserve. The other half would be used in place of potable water, thereby increasing the amount of potabl water available for allocation by roughly 600 acre feet per year.. Planning for future water use in the city is based on an average consumption of 145 gallons per day per person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption during and since the most recent drought. Based on this water use rate and current city population, presen demand is about 6,962 acre-feet per year. This number is recalculated annually using updated populatio estimates from the California Department of Finance. The difference between safe annual yield and presen demand is 773 acre-feet per year, which is available to serve new development. Half this amount (386 acre- feet) is available for development in annexation areas. 14 3-122 Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources Sources Potent Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation Issues Unless Impact PP Y mitigation Incorporated Until retrofit of the entire city is essentially complete, all developers are subject. to the City's Water Allocation regulations and must retrofit existing facilities with low-flow plumbing fixtures in order to offset twice the expected demand of their development prior to issuance of a building permit. The Utilities Department staff estimates that remaining opportunities for retrofitting could reduce current water use b 500 acre-feet per year. Existing development on site is currently supplied by well water. The applicant could continue to use wel water for landscape irrigation to reduce demand for city water. CONCLUSION: Less than significant. The project's estimated water demand is very low— less than 3 acre- feet per year. Compliance with Water Allocation regulations will ensure water supply availability. 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 CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no aesthetic impacts. Development of the site to be annexed will be subject to architectural review and approval to ensure against negative aesthetic impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? x b) Disturb archaeological resources? 15 x c) Affect historical resources? x d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which x would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the x potential impact area? CONCLUSION: Not significant. Annexation by itself will have no impact on cultural resources. A Phase I archaeological report prepared for this site indicates there are no resources present. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks x or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? x Not applicable. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the x 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, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Based on information in the application, a field inspection, and a review of relevant references in the Department, staff has determined that there is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends The Archaeological survey prepared for this site indicates there is no evidence of historical or archaeologica resources on site. 15 3-123 Issues and Supporting Informal . Sources Sources PotentPotentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation Issues unless Impact PP Y mitigation Incorporated b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- x term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? Short-term and long-term goals are the same. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually x limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively 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) The annexation will not result in any potentially significant impacts to the environment. Compliance with adopted policies and regulations related to growth management and resource availability will help t minimize any cumulative impacts related to site development. Mitigation is recommended to reduce cumulative impacts on air quality and energy consumption to a less than significant level. d) Does the project have environmental effects which will x cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? -7 There are no known significant hazards associated with annexation. Mitigation is recommended to reduce t a less than significant level the potential for human beings to be exposed to unsafe soil contamination as result of oil leaks in Unocal's transmission lines which run down Tank Farm Road. 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one c more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (: (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. NA 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. NA c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describ, the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent t which they address site-specific conditions of the project. NA Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087. Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080 (c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21093, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990). 16 3-124 ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annex ,n 18. SOURCE REFERENCES —Available in the Community Development Department if not attached 1. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan: Land Use, Circulation, Noise, Energy, Open Space, Seismic Safety, Water and Wastewater Management Elements 2. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations 3. Report of Site Assessment Unocal 5-Acre Parcel (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map CO 84-54) Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, CA January 31, 1997, prepared by Earth Systems Consultants 4. Health Risk Assessment and health and Safety Plan addressing the Tank Farm Road Pipeline, prepared by England and Associates, 1996 and 1997, Project #'s 147-H and 147-1 5. County of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo Area Plan, January 1997 6. City of San Luis Obispo Source Reduction and Recycling Element 7. 1995 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County 8. SLO County Airport Land Use Plan 9. Soils Engineering Report for the A & R Welding Company prepared by Buena Engineers, Inc. Job No. B-16606-SL1. September, 1986 10. City of San Luis Obispo Informational Map Atlas 11. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, effective January 1, 1990 12. Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation 13. City Department and other agency comments 14. Brown and Caldwell Site Investigation Report for Tank Farm Properties, August 16, 1996 15. Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Farm Supply Annexation, prepared by Thor Conway, December 6, 1999 16. Memo from Desiree Douglas to Patti Whalen, Cannon and Associates, regarding a biological survey conducted on December 6, 1999, dated January 14, 2000 17. Memo from Tim Girvin regarding project water allocation, dated January 18, 2000 ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity map Site location map showing all three annexations General Plan designations map City zoning map Soil contamination map Project description Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation City Department Comments Memo from Tim Girvin regarding water allocation Memo from Desiree Douglas regarding biological assessment 17 3-125 ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annex �n 19. MITIGATION MEASURES/MONITORING PROGRAM Soil Mitigation Measure: 1 . A deed notification regarding on-site soil contamination shall be Contamin- recorded to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief prior to building or ation grading permit issuance. 2. A site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and approved prior to any issuance of building or grading permits. 3. Compliance with provisions of the basic notification document prepared by England and Associates for Unocal (Project No. 147-I) and with a Health and Risk Assessment prepared specifically for this site shall be required as part of any building or grading permit issued for work on this site. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without the requirement for compliance with recommendations in the health and risk assessments. Solid Mitigation Measure: 3. Future site development shall include a solid waste recycling plan Waste for recycling discarded building materials, such as concrete, sheetrock, wood, and metals, from the construction site. The plan must be submitted for approval by the Community Development Director, prior to building permit issuance. 5. Future site development shall incorporate convenient facilities for interior and exterior on-site recycling. Monitoring Program: No building or grading permits will be issued without compliance with this mitigation measure. Energy Mitigation Measure: 6. New buildings constructed on this site shall incorporate the following Conserva- as feasible: tion • skylights to maximize natural day lighting; • operable windows to maximize natural ventilation; and • energy-efficient lighting systems for both interior and exterior use. If these features are not included or feasible in the design of new buildings, the project architect shall document why they were determined to be infeasible. The Community Development Director shall review this document and make a final decision as to the feasibility of incorporating these energy conserving features. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. Air Mitigation Measure: 7. The project shall include: Quality • 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; and • extensive tree planting in the parking areas to help reduce evaporative emissions from automobiles. Monitoring Program: Architectural review and building permit issuance. 18 3-126 _ .\', '� ^:•��27`.\� " Eli .71 ^�. m EP Ll L-! -71 I IL _ L. - I � j I i - II Il ll-. J �I i7 I Vicinity N 204 TANK FAR. 0 3W 6W WO � ANNX 206-99 A 3-127 SOCIAL SECURITY M o U N Vi ` pr OFFICE ■ O c, San alas i C 01 a 1 0 ri °ad (wt.) 0 w.; ro.SQ o Prado Road; 1 , Lttls Bonetti Dr. BORDER Q+0 • �Q' Ink I t o o i e tib iLM F � . Park ca Grana a~� nve V) Q / � �n oo � Meissner a e .. ,�. Cook >° Q, Hind Ln. Business Park J� Farm Supply Site d tiJar�Ao o ' 4 Tank Farm Road has Praderasa�f J „Short St. @own A&R Welding Or o -; I Site hup.-0.. osa Dr• 0 V ' Verdes y Suburban Road �V//o Los o PaclBell �6 , '_"'. S 1 Ce '___�__ S oso alley ��//oi`+l• N o ¢MUSSON FUSCHOOL V C'r/d Not to Scale�- `. q Existing San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of: � 0 � � 0 � � M � � M � A&R Welding, Farm Supply, Concuirently-Proposed Annexation Areas and PacBell .... ...................................„.., To: City of San Luis Obispo �a11YlOIZ CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED Site Locations ASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS 980115\3 ExhibiLs.pm651211/99 3-128 _71 MARGARITA AREA ... ...... .. .... HIOWUERA COMMERCE 'PARK:- Fa rff 1--!--- AM= -SUPP-1y= nfte­ IN NN� Welding X, \ .... ...... N -N\' N RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE: A large area for the development of a Land to remain open for the protection, variety of housing types along with use,and enjoyment of natural resources. supporting uses such as parks,elemen- While they are not shown on this map, tary schools,and convenience shopping. all creeks are within this category. GOVERNMENT FACILITIES: SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING: Business services,wholesaling and sales of large items,and light manufacturing. (Note:see policies for airport area) RECREATION: BUSINESS PARK: Publicly or privately owned recreation An area to be kept in low intensity uses facilities,either outdoors or buildings in until developed as a campus-like setting a park setting. under a master plan. CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED City of San Luis Obispo ASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS General Plan Designations 98011513 Exhibits.pff8512MM9 3-129 C-S C-S S GS-SP M-SP Farm Supply m (Prezone C-S) :R-2-S m u cioS-zo i A&R Welding (Prezone C-S) ,R-1 !GS" _ GS-S PacBell (Prezone M) R-1-PD M R-2-PD ��- 'mss' a-m_- .. . _ -' -r-<.�-:�z-_�-•--.x: TM Y 7 T %I City Limit Line Urban Reserve Line 200 0 200 400 Feet Concurrently Proposed ExlstlnC.i and pRoposEb Annexation Areas ZonlnG 6esignatlons 50 —0 50 o 4 Y /1p X— 1J x n ��� �� O❑CJS ole _ o e � x v a v _ f 111 w a c a r oY p x > p S 7. o m z a o a ooJ M o� = o z ] I x x—X—X— C 0 g x o r I ^yn -0cT—x— x_ x co CD x ^ c ^ a � � a z x o �I o o 'y t- o c x = L x x Uuu C z ® D D n P z Z > DCO(USJ O r O00 fCD NGD A � � Ix x �L-XJ x x-x x x a Li 0 m P25 m mr p0-1. fi o O r1 D D a D O a z z m DDti Y.• z i O m a� m, A PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND INFORMATION Farm Supply Company-Proposed Annexation Application For Annexation, including Prezoning and Environmental Impact Determination for Farm Supply Company(north side of Tank Farm Road, easterly of South Higuera Street) APN 076-351-042. Intent. The intent of this project is to annex the subject parcel to the City of San Luis Obispo, and to provide an approved commercial development which follows the Interim Annexation Guidelines for the Airport Area. The advantages of annexation to the City include the City's participation in the design of the development, and the receipt of economic benefits flowing from an appropriate development. The advantage of annexation for Farm Supply Company will be to provide it access to city services, including water and sewer. This annexation proposal includes prezoning to establish zoning of"Service Commercial"/C-S. Proposed Development. The applicants have designed a commercial development site plan with the following characteristics: 1. The commercial facility planned for this site includes a 26,000 square foot building (providing for 14,000 square feet of sales space, 7,000 square feet of storage, and 5,000 square feet of office use). Additionally, this facility includes two 3,200 square foot hay and pole storage barns, and a 10,000 square foot area for a plant nursery. 2. Sixty-nine parking spaces are proposed, including space for vehicles with trailers. 3. Access will be provided by a 30-foot wide paved access road along the western boundary, in conjunction with an adjoining 30-foot wide easement. 4. The developed site will include a 125-foot wide landscaping improvement along Tank Farm Road. 5. Special amenities and features include: • Landscaped and monument-signed entry. • Landscaping and tree plantings throughout the facility. • The buildings are designed to provide a balanced architectural statement, and to offer amenities in the site planning, which will conform to site standards so that Farm Supply's aesthetic statement is homogenous and unified. • Street improvements will be provided on Tank Farm,and access to the site will be limited to one curb cut. 3-132 Farm Supply Project Description Page 2 Site Area and Description. The proposed site is approximately 5 acres in area, and was originally developed for agricultural production. Existing vegetation consists of grasses and shrubs; site improvements would entail the clearing of vegetation. Consistency With City Plans. The subject site is part of the City's Urban Reserve area included in the Airport Area Specific Plan. It is City policy to process interim annexations in the airport area during preparation of this specific plan, as authorized by the City Council in March of 1997. This annexation proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use designation of Services and Manufacturing. 9"1151n "m Dmc iptiw.doc 3-133 r+RF�94Y19'+71nd'Q�IS p6 {I"+l'' y � IiZou a, l!di; ii1 I LU � I I I I I I I � I I I I I I IIIIIO rT I i I i I I � a I i I i _ I I I I I I I I i e I I . I I g I I I I I � 6 I I .�-- I m'- 3-134 I I i o _ I C I - I �{J-1 � I ' [ME 0E..: Ilk 3, �, UQ I �I F i I i I - ' =1atF_-1 j � I - I Kim, I I� '� , I P'. �� ; i CR I VA '41' : m p; —_ $, I - � I i i•,is`: - I i 1 I 3-135 November 2, 1998 Andrew Merriam, AICP Principal, Director of Planning Cannon Associates 364 Pacific Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Farm Supply Annexation Dear Andrew: You have requested information concerning fees and conditions that would be applicable in the event your client, Farm Supply Company, were to seek annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo for the new facility they are proposing to construct adjoining east to the Cook Business Park on the north side of Tank Farm road. As concurrent annexation of the Cook property would be required to establish the necessary contiguity for the Farm Supply parcel with the current City boundary, you requested similar information for that adjoining property as well. Provided below is City Staffs estimate of costs for the two properties based on the City Council adopted interim annexation policy. As you know, this policy was adopted by Council for use prior to adoption of an Airport Area Specific Plan, and possible City initiated annexations in that vicinity. It is intended to accommodate applicants who have immediate development needs, and would otherwise be required to develop under County jurisdiction with a potential for redundant (and possibly unnecessary) costs for lesser service. BACKGROUND Farm Supply Company is an agricultural cooperative that will be relocating from their current location on the south side of Tank Farm Road westerly of Broad Street/highway 227. The proposed site is approximately five acres in area, and is currently devoted to agricultural production. Planned facilities include: a 26,000 square foot building accommodating 14,000 square feet of sales space, 7,000 square feet of storage, and 5,000 square feet of office use. Adjoining that building will be 10,000 square feet of plant nursery, with two 3,200 square foot hay and pole storage barns nearby. Sixty-nine (69) automobile parking spaces are planned, with space for vehicles with trailers as well. 3-136 Page 2. The Cook Business Park is a commercial condominium of like size to the Farm Supply property, but is completely developed with seven light industriaUservice commercial type structures, and associated parking and supporting infrastructure. Current uses range from agricultural feed supply to automobile repair. The development is served by private well and septic systems. On-site water storage for the fire suppression, and storm water detention basins are provided. IMPACT FEES Utilities: Water: At the time of development you must create a water allocation based upon the proposed use, and pay an impact fee. At the present time the allocation would be developed through retrofitting existing water using facilities in the City. The cost of retrofitting is credited up to $150 per bathroom retrofitted against the water impact fee. For commercial properties the impact fee is based on the size of the water meter required to provide the amount of water service needed, and is subject to several variables. For example, you may choose to use well water for landscape irrigation purposes, and thus reduce your required allocation and commodity charge (monthly water bill). A dual system such as this will require prior approval of an agreement between Farm Supply and the City. Farm Supply would be responsible for extending the public water main in Tank Farm Road at its full planned size (12") to your easterly property line, and installing necessary fire hydrants along your frontage. Future cost reimbursement would be available, as other users come on-line, for the equitable share of this pipe and installation as determined by the City's Public Works and Utilities Directors. For example, the Cook Business Park, being a developed property currently relying on private wells and septic systems, could continue to use those systems after annexation until they desired to connect or their systems failed. At that time, they would be required to establish an allocation and pay impact fees as noted above for Farm Supply, and in addition would be required to pay their prorated share of the cost of extending the water line. Interim connection of the Cook Business Park to the City's water system for fire protection purposes only would not require a water allocation, but would be subject to a small monthly access charge and any reimbursement fees. Appropriate backflow prevention will be necessary on any property where a connection to the City water system is established in conjunction with continued use of an on-site well. 3-137 Page 3. Wastewater: Farm Supply would be required to extend the existing sewer main in Tank Farm Road from the Strasbaugh property (at the existing City Limit to the west) to the easterly Farm Supply property line, or to some point within the street which extends northerly from Tank Farm Road between the Cook business Park and Farm Supply, as determined by the City Public Works and Utility Departments. The final plans prepared by a civil engineer hired by Farm Supply would be based on a preliminary design that evaluates the feasibility of serving additional properties to the east and north, based on topographical limitations. The above comments relating to reimbursement for future connections by non-participating properties to the water line would also apply with the sewer extension. A wastewater impact fee will be required upon connection to the City's sewer system, and is determined by the size of the water meter installed. As previously discussed with you, because the sewer lift station serving this portion of Tank Farm Road is at capacity, the City cannot allow additional sewer connections in the next 24 to 36 months. Once anticipated upgrades to the lift station are completed, new connections could be allowed. In the interim, it appears possible that through agreement between Farm Supply and the City use of an on-site septic system could be allowed. Under current City policy, existing septic systems on the Cook Business Park could continue to be . used until they failed, needed to be replaced for other reasons, or redevelopment of the site occurred. Examples of fees are: Water Impact fee, 1" meter $13,086 Wastewater Impact fee, 1"meter $ 5,392 Creek-side/Silver City lift station fee ($158.07 per acre x 5 acres) $ 790 TRANSPORTAION Existing development at the time of annexation, such as the Cook business Park, is not subject to transportation impact fees. An impact fee will be applicable to any new structures, or the expansion of existing structures, which require building permits in the City. For the Farm Supply project that would amount to: Retail store and stock/storage area (21,000 sq. ft. @ $2.096) $44,016 Corporate office area (5,000 sq. ft. @ $2.665) $13,325 Open sided storage structures such as the pole bams for hay are exempt from transportation impact fees. 3-138 Page 4. PROCESSING FEES Annexation $ 2,600 Prezoning $ 1,987 Environmental Review. $ 669 Public Works Plan Check and Inspection Fees would be assessed at the following rates for water and sewer main extensions, the widening of Tank Farm road, and similar infrastructure improvements: Improvement Plan Check: $294 plus 1.5% of construction costs Construction Inspection: $1,400 plus 6.1% of construction costs If a parcel map is processed in the City after annexation to establish the UNOCAL obligation along the Tank Farm Road frontage, there would be Planning and Public Works fees of$3,728 for that map process. If the division is completed in the County prior to annexation, these fees would not apply. Additional fees such as architectural review, building plan check and construction inspection would be charged after annexation in conjunction with processing approvals for the new structures. Representative fees would be: Architectural Review $ 732 Building Plan Check Fees $11,587 Construction Permit Fees $12,945 Fire Safety Surcharge and water meter installation $ 2,105 OPEN SPACE FEE The City's General Plan requires development in the Airport Area to contribute to the acquisition of open space. The Interim Policy establishes a fee of$2,500 per underdeveloped acre at the time of annexation, or dedication of "equivalent credible acreage" as determined by the City's Natural Resources Manager. The Cook Business Park acreage is considered developed, and thus not subject to this fee. The fee for the Farm Supply property would be: Five(5) acres @ $2,500 per acre $12,500 DEFERRED AREA-WIDE IMPACT FEE This fee represents the undeveloped portion of your properties share of area-wide infrastructure for the buildout of.the airport area, such as major roads, trunk water 3-139 Page 5. and sewer improvements, and storm drain improvements, that are beyond those associated with the direct extension of service to your property. The fee also includes a proportionate contribution toward the preparation of the Airport Area Specific Plan. This fee is due prior to final Council action on the annexation, and must be paid in full or guaranteed by an acceptable letter of credit with a minimum term of five (5) years. Within that five year period the surety may be retired by payment in full at any time prior to Council adoption of a fee ordinance replacing the interim policy. If construction of area-wide infrastructure is not commenced within five years of completion of your construction, the surety would be canceled. If, however, these costs are recovered through a future assessment district, the City also requires that you agree to either vote affirmatively for the formation of the district or pay your proportional costs in full. The Cook Business Park would not accrue this fee as it is presently developed. Five (5) acres @ $15,538 per acre $ 77,690 OTHER ISSUES Following the completion of annexation, evaluation of any new construction on the Farm Supply property will include consideration of general improvement needs in the vicinity, and could result in conditions of approval for the new construction. Example of such considerations include: Dedication of right-of-way along the Tank Farm Road frontage consistent with the widening taking place to the west of your property along the frontage of the Cook Business Park. Construction of curb, gutter and separated sidewalk with associated street paveout and traffic striping, and any necessary drainage facilities along the Tank Farm Road frontage. Right-of-way dedication and frontage improvements to the final configuration will also be required along the secondary street frontage along the westerly side of the property. Installation of street lights as necessary along both street frontages. Planting of street trees on both streets at the rate of one tree per 35 feet of street frontage. 3-140 Page 6. Development of improvement plans for all utilities to serve the area, including an appropriate cost sharing distribution for all property owners. Provision as necessary of detailed hydraulic and hydrologic analyses to establish 100 year storm flooding depths/elevations to assure that new structures or building pads are at least one foot above those elevations in accordance with City and Federal Flood Plain Management Policies. Important Note: The above estimated costs related only to the costs associated with the annexation and development of the Farm Supply property in the City of San Luis Obispo. Your ongoing "cost of doing business", including municipally assessed taxes, are matters to be estimated by you. Two revenue sources where we know there are differences between the City and the County are Business, and Utility Users Taxes. If you need information to assist you with those estimates, please contact Linda Asprion, Revenue Manager at 781-7126. ANNEXATION COST SUMMARY Our best estimate of costs which you can expect at the time of annexation would be: Processing Fees $ 5,256 Open Space Fee $12,500 Interim Annexation Fee (security) $77,690 As indicated above, there will be additional processing fees and improvement costs associate with further development of the Fane Supply property once annexation is completed. These will be consistent with similar charges assessed any other property within the City upon development, and are not established by the annexation process. If you have any other questions regarding the information presented above, or other aspects of annexation to the city, please let me know. Sincerely, Arnold B. Jonas Community Development Director c: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer 3-141 Public Works - The following comments are to be applied generally to all three annexations (appl #'s 206-991188-99 & 213-99: The processing of these three annexations at the same time presents an issue regarding the inclusion of Tank Farm Road (TFR). Since it cannot be guaranteed that all three annexations will be completed at the same time, each annexation(appl #'s 206-99, 188-99 & 213-99) must include all of TFR between the existing City Limits and each respective annexation. This will insure that if one annexation is not completed, or delayed, the annexation of TFR will be continuous and without"gaps" remaining under County jurisdiction. The proposed development of these properties brings the following issues to be addressed upon receipt of a formal development application: 1. A parcel map will be required to separate the front portion of this site, based on information conveyed to staff that it is to remain in Unocal ownership under agreement, pending cleanup of apparent hydrocarbon contamination within that area. 2. Drainage and detention basins will need to be incorporated into project plans and must comply with City and Airport Area Drainage Report criteria. (A previous drainage study in this area was completed by-Cannon & Assoc. and may include a portion of the subject properties). 3. Improvement of Tank Farm Road will include detached sidewalks, with a landscaped parkway, curb & gutter, street pavement, raised median island(as required to control traffic movements and pedestrian safety, due to relatively high traffic speeds along this corridor), striping, street trees, street lighting, etc., per the City and County adopted master plan. Any additional street dedication of R/W to accommodate the adopted County and City setback line(100 ft. wide) will be required,to the satisfaction of the Pubic Works Director. 4. The master plan for circulation includes a proposed public street extension between this site and the Cook Industrial Park to the east and along the rear of the site. As a condition of the parcel map noted above and/or development of this site, standard City frontage and street improvements and other typical improvements will be required,along with any necessary R/W dedication. Acceptance of the street by the City (or County) may be postponed until a future date, when all improvements are installed to City standards,to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 5. Extension of a City water main, fire hydrants and a sewer main will need to be included in the project scope, to the easterly boundary of the site, and/or possibly within the proposed street extension noted in 4. 6. If the property includes existing wells (active or inactive) that are to remain, all water services to the site (including fire lines) will need to be fitted with appropriate USC approved backflow devices. 3-142 LEFire Prevention Bureau Memorandum To: Whitney Mclivain From: Darren Drake, Fire Marshal Date: December 2, 1999 Re: 204 Tank Farm Rd.—Farm Supply Fire Department Access: Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the California Fire Code. Roadways shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. Access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of a 60,000 pound fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Water Supplies: Water supplies shall be in accordance with Sections 901 and 903 of the California Fire Code. An approved water supply connected to the City distribution system and capable of providing the required fire flow for fire protection is required. The fire flow shall be determining using Appendix III-A of the California Fire Code. Fire Hydrants: Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the California Fire Code. The location, number and type of hydrants connected to the City system shall be determined using Appendix III-B of the California Fire Code and the approved City Engineering Standards. Fire Protection Systems and Equipment: Fire protection systems shall be in accordance with the Califomia Fire Code and California Building Code as amended by the City. Fire Safety During Construction: Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Article 87 of the Califomia Fire Code. Environmental Assessment: Agricultural areas (such as barns, storage, repair, parking and fueling areas or facilities) shall have an environmental assessment conducted. Areas shall be reviewed for metals, solvents, pesticides, herbicides,asbestos and fuel hydrocarbons. This proposed property and development is in close proximity to underground oil pipelines and areas that have had a history of contamination. It is recommended that all development within Unocal's Tank Farm Pipeline comply with the following: 3-143 1. Require a deed notification with reference to the potential or actual area contamination. 2. Require owners,developers, and contractors within the area to obtain a copy of a basic notification document prepared by England&associates for Unocal. The document is entitled: Health and Safety Plan Crude Oil,Hazard and Material Handling Tank Farm Road Pipeline Leak Site San Luis Obispo,California Project No. 147-1 3. In the event contamination is confirmed a site specific Health and Risk Assessment shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. •Page 2 3-144 city of san lues oBispo utilities conscRvation office Memorandum January 18, 2000 To: Whitney McIlvaine, As late Planner From: Tim A. Girvin, Utilities Conservation Technician Subject: Farm Supply Annexation Based on the plans that were supplied for the proposed development of a new facility onto an annexed parcel, I have estimated the following water allocation. There is a possibility that the owner will utilize a water well for irrigation purposes and this would allow for a reduction in the allocation amount for all building areas excluding the nursery area. I will address the nursery below. All other water uses are as follows: Use Factor Allocation Req'd Indoor Only Building Type Sq. Ft. AF/ 1,000 in Acre Feet (AF) in Acre Feet Retail 14,000 .06 .84 .59 Office 7,600 .06 .46 .32 Warehouse 6,400 .056 .64 .51 Total 1.94 1.42 Nursery Use .75 .75 Grand Total 2.69 2.17 Although the nursery may be supplied with well water it will still need to have a water allocation in order to insure water availability in the event the well is not available in the future. Based on information provided by staff at the current Farm Supply I estimate the nursery will require .75 acre feet of water per year. 3-145 lamon MEMORANDUM EMORANDUM ENGINEERS Date: January 14,2000 From: Desiree Douglass, Environmental Specialist PLANNERS To: Patti Whelen Phone: (805) 878-4829 SURVEYORS Company: Cannon Associates 364 Pacific Street Address: San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Job No: 98-0115 RECM Project: Farm Supply Annexation of Tank Farm Road Parcel AN 1 S 2000 Subject: Biological Survey CIIY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING Grading and Drainage Dear Patti: Water, Sewer, Storm Drain Systems Flood/Erosion Control As requested, I conducted a site reconnaissance on December 6, 1999, of the &IIECHANICALproposed Farm Supply site (currently under ownership of Unocal). This parcel is Facility cciii1 ty D�esiign located along Tank Farm Road, immediately east of the Cook Business Park. The Process Hazard Analysis parcel is currently located in the County of San Luis Obispo,but application has been O&M Engineering made to annex this property to the City of San Luis Obispo. The purpose of the site Support visit was to determine whether any jurisdictional wetlands or other biological ,.tipment Reliability Program Development resources exist on the subject property. PLANNING Site Evaluation and The subject parcel is approximately 4.70 acres in size with flat topography. The Feasibility Studies parcel consists of agricultural fields which have been tilled as recently as within the Permitting and Agency last two months. Weed vegetation was emerging over the field and, at that time, Approvals y r g g g Tentative Maps and was approximately 2 inches in height. The property is located immediately east of Specific Plans the Cook Business Park and lies approximately 3 feet to 1.5 feet lower in elevation Coastal Commission Processing than the business park property. There are no ditches or culverts draining stormwater SURVEYING from the business park property onto the subject property. Potential habitat for Boundary Surveys wildlife species is negligible due to the cultivated and dry conditions on the subject Topographic Surveys property. GPS Geodetic Surveys Mapping and Imaging Methods Construction Layout FINANCIAL ANALYSIS During the site investigation two soil pits were dug to check for hydric soil indicators Financial Plans in the top 18 inches, and vegetation was sampled to determine if there were areas Rate Studies and Reserve Analyses with a predominance of hydrophytic species. The property was investigated for signs Special District of seasonal ponding of water to be considered in conjunction with hydric soils and Management hydrophytic vegetation as evidence of a jurisdictional wetland hydrologic regime. Water Management Potential habitat for wildlife species was noted as absent. 364 PACIFIC STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 3-146PAGE 1 of 3 iamon MEMORANDUM ASSOCIATES Subject: Farm Supply Annexation of Tank Farm Road Parcel Date: January 14, 2000 Findings Soils The subject parcel is currently used for agricultural purposes, and soils in the upper 12 inches were recently disturbed from tilling. Soils at the data plot locations were very dark grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2) and very dark brown(1 OYR 2/2) loamy clays with a considerable amount of gravel in some locations. There was no sign of mottling, oxidized root channels, scouring, or other indicators of wetland hydrologic regimes at the data plots. Soils were barely moist at the time of the field investigation. Root zones were deep (up to 16 inches). The soils observed did not meet the criteria for hydric soils. Vegetation Because the property was recently tilled, vegetation was 2 to 4 inches high and consisted of weedy species. Orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata) was the dominant species. Other species observed included morning glory, star thistle, cress, tarweed, and dandelion. The predominance of weedy species that are rated"upland"or "facultative upland" is indicative of a disturbed upland plant community. Hydrology The property is primarily flat and lies approximately 1'/z to 3 feet lower in elevation than the adjacent Cook Business Park property to the west. During storm events, stormwater likely sheetflows from the Cook Business Park property onto the west side of the subject property. Soils were moist to barely moist at the time of the field investigation. There was no sign of mottling, oxidized root channels, scouring, or other indicators of wetland hydrologic regimes observed at the data plots. Conclusions Based on soil and hydrologic information obtained from the data plots, and vegetation observed at the time of the field investigation, the conditions on the . subject parcel are typical of disturbed agricultural uplands. This investigation concludes that there are no jurisdictional wetlands on the subject property. In addition, potential wildlife habitat was also found to be lacking on the subject property. 364 PACIFIC STREET SAN Luis OBISPO, CA 93401 3-147 PAGE 2 OF 3 C • • • r y' ' y .. Xr- ;- LPf "�. _ ..' Vii., :+' _r:,.•, • t+ -Alp ., .. F• '-l':. + I • S/ N LUIS OBISPO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING VICTOR HOLANDA, AICP DIRECTOR BRYCE TINGLE, AICP ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ELLEN CARROLL ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR BARNEY MCCAY January 25, 2000 CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL PATRICK BRUN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE OFFICER Community Development Dept./Whitney McllvF:ne City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93041 SUBJECT: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PERMIT NO. 206-99 - FARM SUPPLY (ANNEXATION) Thank you for referring the above project to the Airport Land Use Commission. The proposed annexation is compatible with the San Luis Obispo County Airport's Land Use Plan (ALUP), and the proposed commercial project (with new retail store) is conditionally approvable. On January 19, 2000, the Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the application, and recommends that the City approve the project with the conditions in the attached report. Please call me if you have questions or comments (781-5701). Sincerely Ted Bench Airport Land Use Commission COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER SAN LUIS OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93408 (805)781-5!3 �4Q800-834-4636 EMAIL. ipcoping®slonet.org • FAX: (805)781-1242 - WEBSITE: http://www.sionet.org/vv/ipcopIng i PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1/26/00- 3=150 Draft Planning Commission I es January 26, 2000 Page 9 Commissioner Cooper would like to establish a protocol where commissioners can notify ff in advance of absences to void situations involving quorums. Commission Jeffrey voiced concern about commissioners giving advanced notice of absences and a hearing was scheduled with the potential for lack of a quorum. Better staff-commis ' n communication should be established. Commissioner Loh reque d the minutes reflect specifically why a commissioner has refrained from participation in articular item. Chairman Ready could not recollec iving significant advance notice with regards to his August absence and apologized an accepted full responsibility for any problems caused by this absence. Any failure to r ort absenteeism to the City Council as may be required by the handbook falls upon the oulders of the chairman and he is willing to address the matter further with Council if the o desire. The Commission did recognize the August date wher ' a quorum was not reached did have an affect on the Commission's calendar and that a Commission convened the following two hearings one hour early in order to accomplis is charge. Items 4, 5, and 6 were considered as one hearing item. 4. 196 Suburban Road, ANNX/R and ER 213-99: Request to annex 4.3 acres; rezone property to M (Manufacturing) or C-S (Commercial-Service), and environmental review; Pacific Bell, applicant. 5. 204 Tank Farm Road, ANNX/R and ER 206-00: Request to annex 5+ acres, rezone property to C-S (Commercial-Service), and environmental review; Farm Supply Company, applicant. 6. 205 Tank Farm Road, ANNX/R and 206-99: Request to annex approximately three acres, rezone property C-S (Commercial-Service), and environmental review; A & R Welding Company (Don Erbstoesser), applicant. Commissioner Senn refrained from participation due to a potential conflict of interest. He has a business relationship with one of the applicants. Associate Planner Mcllvaine presented the staff report and recommended that the Commission recommend that the City Council (1) pass-to-print an ordinance adopting the mitigated negative of environmental impact (ER 188-99, ER 206-99, and ER 213- 99) and prezoning the annexation areas Commercial Service (C-S) and Manufacturing (M) and (2) adopt a resolution recommending that LAFCO approve the annexations. Commissioner Cooper asked if annexation approval would lock the applicants into the site plans. 3-151. Draft Planning Commission tes January 26, 2000 Page 10 Associate Planner Mcllvaine replied no. Commissioner Whittlesey asked if annexation requires the Pacific Bell property to retrofit their water even though the property is already developed. Associate Planner Mcllvaine stated they would not have to perform water retrofits until their on-site system fails and then they would connect to City water. Pacific Bell would like to connect to City water and sewer now. Commissioner Whittlesey had staff comment on recommended mitigation measures in relation to the Tank Farm contamination plume. Commissioner Jeffrey referred to page 12 of the Pacific Bell initial study and asked to whom the assessment will be submitted. Associate Planner Mcllvaine stated the assessment would be submitted to the City and reviewed by the Fire and Community Development Departments. Commissioner Jeffrey recommended each initial study hazard section specify that notice will be given to the Community Development Department and that notification be given to persons working in contamination areas that such hazards exist. Commissioner Loh complimented staff on their well-written report and organized annexation configuration. Commissioner Peterson expressed concern with Mitigation Measure 5, page 17 of the A & R Welding initial study because the City does not review mitigation unfeasibility. Chairman Ready had staff provide an update on annexation review by the Airport Land Use Commission. Commissioner Whittlesey noted two of the initial studies contain some discussion of a recycling plan and solid waste management plan for demolition and new construction, but would like to include ongoing operations as well. Additionally, the Pacific Bell annexation may have an opportunity, even though it's already a developed site, to comply with solid waste disposal management practices. She suggested consideration be given to air pollution control in relation to fleets of vehicles related to businesses on these three sites. Commissioner Jeffrey questioned staff on soundproofing requirements. There were no further comments/questions and the public comment period was opened. PUBLIC COMMENT: Kim Hatch, Pults and Associates, representing the A & R Welding, urged approval of the annexations as presented, and complimented staff on their hard work. 3-152 Draft Planning Commission A as January26, 2000 Page 11 Commissioner Loh questioned the Tank Farm Road access and the availability of another access. Mr. Hatch stated the Tank Farm Road access is the only option available, but noted that access to this site will be coordinated with access to the Farm Supply site across Tank Farm Road. Patti Whelen, Cannon and Associates, representing Farm Supply and Pack Bell, urged approval of the annexations. Jim Brabeck, Farm Supply general manager, provided the history of the business and complimented staff on their hard work. Seeing no further speakers come forward, the public comment session was closed. COMMISSION COMMENT: Commissioner Loh moved to recommend that the City Council (1) pass-to-print an ordinance adopting the mitigated negative declarations of environmental impact (ER 188-99, 206-99, and 213-99) and prezoning the annexation areas Service Commercial (C-S) and Manufacturing (M) and (2) adopt a resolution recommending that LAFCO approve the annexations. Commissioner Jeffrey seconded the motion. Commissioner Peterson requested Mitigation Measure 5 of both the Farm Supply and A & R Welding initial studies be modified to reflect that the Community Development Director shall review this documentation and make a final determination as to feasibility of incorporating energy conserving features. Commissioners Loh and Jeffrey accepted the recommended modification. Commissioner Whittlesey suggested including "and ongoing operations" to the mitigation measure for the Farm Supply for solid waste capacity and that a similar mitigation be incorporated in the initial studies for both A & R Welding and Pacific Bell that recognizes recycling plans for their ongoing operations. Commissioner Loh and Jeffrey accepted the recommended amendment. Commissioner Jeffrey recommended site-specific health assessments be submitted to the Community Development Director and approved prior to issuance of building and/or grading permits. Commissioner Loh and Jeffrey accepted the recommended amendment. AYES: Commrs. Loh, Jeffrey, Whittlesey, Peterson, Cooper, and Ready NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Commr. Senn 3-153 Draft Planning Commission A es January 26, 2000 Page 12 The motion carried 6-0-0. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:34 p.m. to the next regular meeting scheduled for February 9, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, Leaha K. Magee Recording Secretary 3-154 PACIFIC BELL PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT 3-155 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 APN: 076-352-033 PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND PACIFIC BELL sT This annexation agreement is made and entered into this Z ) day ofF$�, 2000, by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a chartered municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") whose address is 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo California 93401; and whose address is 2600 Camino Ramon, Room 3E402, San Ramon, California 94583 (hereinafter referred to as "OWNERS"), pursuant to the authority of the City Charter and Section 56000, et. seq., of the California Government Code. CITY and OWNERS shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as "PARTIES." RECITALS rth, WHEREAS, r�aeffieT. lephRRA ,,.,a T. 19gFaAh C:Q;:Rt;aRaowner in fee of certain real property in the County of San Luis Obispo, commonly known as 196 Suburban Road, APN #076-352-033, further described in the attached Exhibit A and referred to herein as the "subject property"; and WHEREAS, the subject property is proposed for annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo (City File No. ANNX/R/ER 213-99); and WHEREAS, to provide for the City's orderly growth and development, consistent with the General Plan, the PARTIES anticipate that the subject property will be annexed to the City pursuant to terms and procedures of the California Government Code 56000 et seq; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements stated herein, PARTIES agree as follows: 1. URBAN SERVICES. Upon annexation, the property shall be entitled to the full range of City services, including but not limited to water and sewer services, police and fire protection, and general government services, some of which are described below in more detail: OL Pacific Bell Telephone Company, a California corporation 3-156 Pacific Bell Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER 213-99 Page 2 Water Service. CITY agrees to provide water service, as available, for fire fighting and domestic purposes to the subject property upon request of OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances, including but not limited to retrofit requirements. Any connection to City water will require the development of a water allocation through the retrofit program. Use of on-site ground water or other sources for potable or non-potable uses may continue for existing development, provided they continue to meet County Health Department standards. Use of groundwater for new development will comply with applicable City policies. In the event of abandonment or failure of well(s), OWNERS shall comply with applicable State and County regulations regarding well abandonment. Non-potable water may be used for landscape irrigation. Sewer Service. City agrees to provide sanitary sewer service, as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Fire Protection. City agrees to provide fire protection service, as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Development on the subject property must connect its fire suppression system to the public water main in Suburban Road and will be charged a monthly fire protection service fee if the property does not have a domestic connection to the City water system. 2. SPECIFIC PLAN AND AREA WIDE PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE FEES. Airport Area Specific Plan and Infrastructure Fee. This $15,538.00 per undeveloped acre fee (Interim Fee) is the estimated apportioned cost of area-wide planning and construction of infrastructure within the Airport Annexation Area (including specific plan preparation, water and sewer system improvements, circulation system improvements, and storm drain system improvements). Since existing development at the time of annexation is not subject to these fees, and since the site is wholly developed, annexation of the property at 196 Suburban Road is not subject to this fee. Any new construction or redevelopment of the site will be subject to the following: Within the next eighteen to thirty months (but not later than five years), the City expects to adopt a finalized specific plan and infrastructure improvement fee (Finalized Fee), form an assessment district or similar funding mechanism (District), or implement some 3-157 Pacific Bell Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER 213-99 Page 3 combination of these two approaches, in order to finance these planning and improvement costs. Since annexation of the property at 196 Suburban Road is not subject to the Interim Fees, OWNERS will not be subject to any future Finalized Fee. In the event that a District approach is adopted by.the City in funding the airport area specific plan and infrastructure improvements instead of (or in combination with) a Finalized Fee, OWNERS and their successors agree to support the formation of such a District. 3. OPEN SPACE. This $2,500.00 per undeveloped acre fee is the apportioned cost for acquisition of an open space buffer to the south of the Airport Area as required by the General Plan. Since there is no undeveloped area on the property at 196 Suburban Road, annexation of this site is not subject to this fee. 4. COMPLIANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS. Once annexed, the property will be subject to the same rules, regulations, laws, fees, and taxes that would be applied to other properties, residences, businesses, and customers in the City under similar circumstances including, but not limited to Building Code, Fire Code, Zoning Regulations, environmental regulations (California Environmental Quality Act), fees, taxes (including business taxes and utility user taxes) and other provisions of the Municipal Code and State laws. 5. PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS. At the time of future development or redevelopment, it shall be the responsibility of the OWNERS to install and/or pay for improvements and fees which may be required by permit, law, rule, regulation, or mitigation, unless otherwise specified in an adopted Airport Area Specific Plan and the certified environmental review document for that specific plan. 6. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this agreement shall begin upon the effective date of the annexation. The agreement shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by mutual consent of the PARTIES. In the event the annexation shall not become effective for any reason whatsoever, this agreement shall terminate and have no force and effect, as if it had never been entered into by the PARTIES. 7. SUCCESSORS, HEIRS, AND ASSIGNS. This agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors, heirs, assigns, and personal representatives of the PARTIES. 8. AMENDMENTS, TIME EXTENSION OR CANCELLATION. This agreement may be amended, extended, or canceled at any time by mutual consent of the PARTIES or their successors in interest. 3-158 Pacific Bell Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER 213-99 Page 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is executed on the date above stated at San Luis Obispo, California. ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED OWNER BY: Director, Corporate eal Estate Transactions for Pacific Bell Telephone Company, a California corporation CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Chartered Municipal Corporation: BY: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Lee Price APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jeffrey Jorgensen 3-159 State of California County of Contra Costa On February21, 2000 before me, Steven D. Sessions, a Notary Public, personally appeared VICKIE L. BERRY personally know to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her authorized capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument the person or entity upon behalf of which the of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my and official seal STEVEN D. SESSIONS N Comm.A 1183467 r—rn NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA UI Contra Costa County Aly Comm. Expires May 14.2002 Title or Type of Document: PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT For City of San Luis Obispo 3-160 Legal Description of property at 196 Suburban Road: THAT PORTION OF LOT 6 OF THE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 240 26, 31 THE NORTH HALF OF LOTS 18� 23, 27, 30 AND THE SOUTH PORTION OF LOT 17 OF THE HARFORD AND CHAPMAN SUBDIVISION IN TOWNSHIP 31 SOUTH, RANEE 12 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO SASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY IN BOOK OF RECORD OF SURVEYS BOOK 1, PAGE 4 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SUBURBAN ROAD C50• WIDE) AT ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE NORTH 00 19' 30" WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 6 967.36 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM ROAD C40' WIDE): THENCE NORTH 890 59' 51" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM ROAD 30.00 FEET, THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM ROAD SOUTH 00 19' 30" EAST PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 6, 430.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 511 21" EAST PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SUBURBAN ROAD 294.75 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE SOUTH 00 14. 12" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF LOT 6, 537.23 FEET TO THE NORTH LINO: OF SUBURBAN ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 890 SZ' 21a WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF SUBURSAW ROAD, .323.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT A pg 1 of 2 3-161 ma LO rn a O 1C xo 39'ILr/ N !L'OIi �I h00/ P Q S �i OJ a • Q ¢ n � C OO q ___________ -------_------------------------- y O P N J U I ♦ a I � m� Y \ O a O ►r'!BL I ------------- f w ¢x D v n M1 ri'fss I W i � • • Q I • 4 WW • h • N I 1 \b. Q P I • • ym 6 to i r sf lBL \ I I U I _ I m � ^ • l I I i O ••R 'd:II O I � I 1 Q1see � ---------------'-=':.'-r+-------------------------___- `mJ 0 r/'Iif N,LO.ON .I �• \=Am p w/�� 06,a •L �0n d P� dKd ((� I � lIMIA ��SO'L04 � O�• ►h'COo �Q41 vI� =� �... O M M1 I•' � - VNa 1 �q \ p�•\ �A F I q. N • !t C!S rNN P U // (AIN n h m n s I M 1 km • b O N m im to Ir�ln I ,J •9 sv►M,o/.ON el wv •O'OLL • `^ J J A w � N aSb9 v^i o _ rrr! a a am„ w ONj In 0� t A a •p i to cy I1 m `N 3F n o u N U J.N^' N II �— 6;�. G raa 19 oV a^ N O ; m O"• F b)/?trJ � _ '•i O J II�..I~rllyyy (/ Z9-II IVd O/ u yl.� v/vi • � V ��m I��I 1S 3-162 �o J A&R WELDING PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT 3-163 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Dept. 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 APN: 076-352-032 PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND A & R WELDING This annexation agreement is made and entered into this 1511 _day ofF-ch , , 2000, by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a chartered municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") whose address is 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401; and A & R Welding located at 205 Tank Farm Rd(hereinafter referred to as "OWNERS"), pur-suant to the authority of the City Charter and Section 56000, et. Seq., of the California Government Code. CITY and OWNERS shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as "PARTIES." RECITALS WHEREAS, A & R Welding are the owners in fee of certain real property in the County of San Luis Obispo, commonly known as 205 Ta.n.k RaIM, APN # o76-352-o32 , further described in the attached Exhibit A and referred to herein as the "subject property"; and WBEREAS, the subject property is proposed for annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo (City File No. _�; and E ANNX/R/ER 188-99 WHEREAS, to provide for the City's orderly growth and development, consistent with the General Plan, the PARTIES anticipate that the subject property will be annexed to the City pursuant to terms and procedures of the California Government Code 56000 et seq; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements stated herein,PARTIES agree as follows: 1. URBAN SERVICES. Upon annexation, the property shall be entitled to the full range of City services, including but not limited to water and sewer services, police and fire protection, and general government services, some of which are described below in more detail: Water Service. CITY agrees to provide water service, as available, for fire fighting and domestic purposes to the subject property upon request of OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances, including but not limited to retrofit requirements. Any connection to City water will require 3-164 Use of on-site ground water or other sources for potable or non-potable uses may continue for existing development,provided they continue to meet County Health Department standards. Use of groundwater for new development will comply with applicable City policies. In the event of abandonment or failure of well(s), OWNERS shall comply with applicable State and County regulations regarding well abandonment. Non-potable water may be used for landscape irrigation. Sewer Service. City agrees to provide sanitary sewer service,as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Fire Protection. City agrees to provide fire protection service, as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Development on the subject property must connect its fire suppression system to the water main in Tank Farm P,nad and will be charged a monthly fire protection service fee. 2. SPECIFIC PLAN AND AREA WIDE PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE FEES. Airport Area Specific Plan and Infrastructure Fee. This $15,538.00 per acre fee (interim fee) is the estimated apportioned cost of area-wide planning and construction of infrastructure within the Airport Annexation Area (including specific plan preparation, water and sewer system improvements, circulation system improvements, and storm drain system improvements). OWNERS hereby agrees to contribute $ 27,347.00 , based upon the size of the OWNERS' lot - 1.76 AC. Such payment shall be paid in full, or secured by a letter of credit, prior to final Council action on the Annexation, and said letter of credit shall be in effect for a period not less than 5 years from the date of completion for that annexation. OWNERS may elect to pay this fee at any time within the five year period and retire the letter of credit. Within the next eighteen to thirty months (but not later than five years), the City expects to adopt a finalized specific plan and infrastructure improvement fee (Finalized Fee), form an assessment district or similar funding mechanism (District), or implement some combination of these two approaches, in order to finance these planning and improvement costs. In the event that the Interim Fee is paid in full prior to the adoption of a Finalized Fee or the formation of a District, all obligations under any such future Finalized Fee or District will have been fully satisfied by payment in full of this Interim Fee amount. If the OWNERS choose not to.pay the Interim Fee prior to the adoption of a Finalized Fee, payment in full of the Finalized Fee amount adopted as it applies to this project will be required at that time, and the letter of credit will be retired. In the event that a District approach is adopted by the City in funding the airport area specific plan and infrastructure improvements 3-165 instead of (or in combination with) a Finalized Fee, OWNERS and their successors agree to support the formation of such a District. 3. OPEN SPACE. This $2,500.00 per acre fee is the apportioned cost for acquisition of an open space buffer to the south of the Airport Area as required by the General Plan. OWNERS agree to contribute $4,400.00 , based upon the size of the OWNERS' lot - 1.76 acres, prior to final Council action on the annexation. 4. COMPLIANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS. Once annexed, the property will be subject to the same rules, regulations, laws, fees, and taxes that would be applied to other properties, residences, businesses, and customers in the City under similar circumstances including, but not limited to Building Code, Fire Code, Zoning Regulations, environmental regulations (California Environmental Quality Act), fees, taxes (including business taxes and utility user taxes) and other provisions of the Municipal Code and State laws. 5. PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS. At the time of future development or redevelopment, it shall be the responsibility of the OWNERS to install and/or pay for improvements and fees which may be required by permit, law, rule, regulation, or mitigation, unless otherwise specified in an adopted Airport Area Specific Plan and the certified environmental review document for that specific plan. 6. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this agreement shall begin upon the effective date of the annexation. The agreement shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by mutual consent of the PARTIES. In the event the annexation shall not become effective for any reason whatsoever, this agreement shall terminate and have no force and effect, as if it had never been entered into by the PARTIES. 7. SUCCESSORS, HEIRS, AND ASSIGNS. This agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors, heirs, assigns, and personal representatives of the PARTIES. 8. AMENDMENTS, TIME EXTENSION OR CANCELLATION. This agreement may be amended, extended, or canceled at any time by mutual consent of the PARTIES or their successors in interest. 3-166 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is executed on the date above stated at San Luis Obispo, California. ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED OWNERS BY: BY: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Chartered Municipal Corporation BY: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jeff Jorgensen 3-167 State of California } County of San Luis Obispo} On February 15, 2000, before me, Diane R. Stuart, Notary Public, personally appeared David Erbstoesser ( ) personally known to me or ( X ) proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his. capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. MW R.STUART WYARY PuBUC-•CALIFORNIA L COWSSION011e260 C fBAN WIS OBISPO COUNTY I_n X W*0mwj=ionEWJWW20.2M Notary Public Preannexation Agreement for 205 Tank Farm Road 3-168 Legal Description of property at 205 Tank Farm Road: Lot 6 of the Subdivision of Lots 24, 26, 31, and the North half of Lots 18, 23, 27, 30 and the South portion of Lot 17 of the Harford and Chapman Subdivision, in Township 31 South, Range 12 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to the Map thereof filed in Book 1, Page 4 of Record of Surveys, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. EXCEPTING therefrom that portion of Lot 6 described in the deed to Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company, a corporation recorded October 31, 1978 in Book 2110, Page 412 of Official Records. 076,352, 032 EXHIBIT A pg 1 of 2 3-169 LO (0 U � m ° U a CL ° � a y_ 19'I/r/ fd'!Id ICI A00/ O 1 cc� a V ¢ C C N(n •' A A 1 N vi �_ OO y __________ ________________________________� N O P eS 396 • 1 v N N C N 1 P p I ^ A v) 0 ¢ 4 A I A Q O U •[986 I sr u I ^ - a q I r m _ ' /,_,A m 1 m A � m A \vIl O ^ m2 \ O P YI n !d'99f------------------------------------- ------------- A r e9't I I ti w • A ; A rmi I P I O s n � ti NI 9•! �%� O 1 \ /1 W I ' A ma I N n /\ ---'-- ---- e r ' i (^I'I w A ^� i9'f 9L n� ♦� � � ? IA w mia P ; O J •1 .ww•��� ti m Obi - a ; y1 l p V 6 Kd = 4iKs P a N i Er � _ a�LL� ss xfA SOYOA co O_m! Ney �y/�' AP'(09 w P J ¢ q N ^ A no � o� mmu n yl T am N Z � vw'woo 3•. a � n' d4 P y/T'O`x9 fr<rs a n) ! m A 17 N m l 0 le Z.16 o II l!1 1 '�. wsr�M,s/.a .i ate• .e'OLL a �J U 5� I•I e m r:csr P a ¢ m 1, N h L9Y(L ; A e a a p n_ a Nip - 1 Wa � U N _. .f .!• �.. OMITlIf � Iq I � iG NpaS ti n, �'�mJ¢ W LI _' A-- N Om d ,O ca OWN C� 0/A ___-n_____ Cn y N'F\ Ivy / Z9-UNd P1 ' C /O/ �b U y 00~ n.n i d .- %bp fix/ O��/ Aqco .r •\vIcq/ ` - msr n� as aaia�ne 3-1,70 Y7 a` ��J FARM SUPPLY PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT 3-171 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 APN: 076-351-042 PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND FARM SUPPLY This annexation agreement is made and entered into this day of 2000, by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a chartered municipal corporatio , (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") whose address is 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401; and San Luis Obispo County Farm Supply Company, dba Farm Supply Company, whose address is P.O. Box 111, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 (hereinafter referred to as "OWNERS"), pursuant to the authority of the City Charter and Section 56000, et. seq., of the California Government Code. CITY and OWNERS shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as "PARTIES." RECITALS WHEREAS, Farm Supply Company is the owner in fee of certain real property in the County of San Luis Obispo, commonly known as 204 Tank Farm Road, APN #076-351- 042, further described in the attached Exhibit A and referred to herein as the "subject property"; and WHEREAS, the subject property is proposed for annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo (City File No. ANNX/R/ER 206-99); and WHEREAS, to provide for the City's orderly growth and development, consistent with the General Plan, the PARTIES anticipate that the subject property will be annexed to the City pursuant to terms and procedures of the California Government Code 56000 et seq; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements stated herein, PARTIES agree as follows: 1. URBAN SERVICES. Upon annexation, the property shall be entitled to the full range of City services, including but not limited to water and sewer services, police and fire protection, and general government services, some of which are described below in more detail: 3-172 Farm Supply Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER 206-99 Page 2 Water Service. CITY agrees to provide water service, as available, for fire fighting and domestic purposes to the subject property upon request of OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances, including but not limited to retrofit requirements. Any connection to City water will require development of a water allocation through the retrofit program. Use of on-site ground water or other sources for potable or non-potable uses may continue for existing development, provided they continue to meet County Health Department standards. Use of groundwater for new development will comply with applicable City policies. In the event of abandonment or failure of well(s), OWNERS shall comply with applicable State and County regulations regarding well abandonment. Non-potable water may be used for landscape irrigation. Sewer Service. City agrees to provide sanitary sewer service, as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Fire Protection. City agrees to provide fire protection service, as available, to the subject property upon request of the OWNERS, subject to the same laws, rules, regulations, and fees applicable to other new users in the City under similar circumstances. Development on the subject property must connect its fire suppression system to the public water main in Tank Farm Road and will be charged a monthly fire protection service fee if the property does not have a domestic connection to the City's water system. 2. SPECIFIC PLAN AND AREA WIDE PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE FEES. Airport Area Specific Plan and Infrastructure Fee. This $15,538.00 per acre fee (interim fee) is the estimated apportioned cost of area-wide planning and construction of infrastructure within the Airport Annexation Area (including specific plan preparation, water and sewer system improvements, circulation system improvements, and storm drain system improvements). OWNERS hereby agrees to contribute $75,670.00, based upon the size of the OWNERS' lot — 4.87 acres. Such payment shall be paid in full, or secured by a letter of credit, prior to final Council action on the annexation, and said letter of credit shall be in effect for a period not less than 5 years from the date of completion for that annexation. OWNERS may elect to pay this fee at any time within the five year period and retire the letter of credit. 3-173 Farm Supply Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER.206-99 Page 3 Within the next eighteen to thirty months (but not later than five years), the City expects to adopt a finalized specific plan and infrastructure improvement fee (Finalized Fee), form an assessment district or similar funding mechanism (District), or implement some combination of these two approaches, in order to finance these planning and improvement costs. In the event that the Interim Fee is paid in full prior to the adoption of a Finalized Fee or the formation of a District, all obligations under any such future Finalized Fee or District will have been fully satisfied by payment in full of this Interim Fee amount. If the OWNERS choose not to pay the Interim Fee prior to the adoption of a Finalized Fee, payment in full of the Finalized Fee amount adopted as it applies to this project will be required at that time, and the letter of credit will be retired. In the event that a District approach is adopted by the City in funding the airport area specific plan and infrastructure improvements instead of (or in combination with) a Finalized Fee, OWNERS and their successors agree to support the formation of such a District. 3. OPEN SPACE. This $2,500.00 per acre fee is the apportioned cost for acquisition of an open space buffer to the south of the Airport Area as required by the General Plan. OWNERS agree to contribute $12,175.00, based upon the size of the OWNERS' lot—4.87 acres, prior to final Council action on the annexation. 4. COMPLIANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS. Once annexed, the property will be subject to the same rules, regulations, laws, fees, and taxes that would be applied to other properties, residences, businesses, and customers in the City under similar circumstances including, but not limited to Building Code, Fire Code, Zoning Regulations, environmental regulations (California Environmental Quality Act), fees, taxes (including business taxes and utility user taxes) and other provisions of the Municipal Code and State laws. 5. PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS. At the time of future development or redevelopment, it shall be the responsibility of the OWNERS to install and/or pay for improvements and fees which may be required by permit, law, rule, regulation, or mitigation, unless otherwise specified in an adopted Airport Area Specific Plan and the certified environmental review document for that specific plan. 6. TERM OF AGREEMENT. The term of this agreement shall begin upon the effective date of the annexation. The agreement shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by mutual consent of the PARTIES. In the event the annexation shall not become effective for any reason whatsoever, this agreement shall terminate and have no force and effect, as if it had never been entered into by the PARTIES. 3-174 Farm Supply Pre-annexation Agreement ANNX/R/ER 206-99 Page 4 7. SUCCESSORS, HEIRS, AND ASSIGNS. This agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors, heirs, assigns, and personal representatives of the PARTIES. 8. AMENDMENTS, TIME EXTENSION OR CANCELLATION. This agreement may be amended, extended, or canceled at any time by mutual consent of the PARTIES or their successors in interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is executed on the date above stated at San Luis Obispo, California. ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED 0:17ERS: \ �Q �sj Ji rabec , General Manager for Farm Supply Company CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Chartered Municipal Corporation: BY: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Lee Price APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Jeffrey Jorgensen 3-1 / 5 MID-STATE BANK CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of my of . On before me, 'Y ,Personally appeared Dace Name, Title of Officer(e-g:-Jww-Bae, Notary Public) ,[ 4--15;-rsonally known to me - OR - [ ] proved to me on the ame(s)of Signer(s) basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personkK whose name(y is/are' subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/ tey executed the same in his/4er/their authorized capacity(i+es'), and that by his/le�ir signature4 on the instrument the person(z , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(z) acted, PATRICIA K MEES executed the instument. COMM. #1155733 • NSAN LUIS 0B SPO COUNTY A " WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Comm.Expires Sept. 18, 2001 Signature of Notary flP'Y'IO1�t4L Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER (PRINCIPAL) DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT [ ] Individual [ ] Corporate Officer Title or Type o ment Title(s) yDocu p f [ ] Partner(s) [ ] Limited ( ] General Number of Pages [ ] Attorney-in-Fact „/��� [ ] Trustee(s) e [ ] Guardian/Conservator Date of ocument [ ] Other: Signer(s)Other Than Names Above Absent Signer (Principal) is Representing: Name of Person(s)or Entity(s) ADM-005 (08/94) Legal Description of property at 204 Tank Farm Road: PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP CO 84-054, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP RECORDED OCTOBER 29, 1985 IN BOOK 38, PAGE 32 OF PARCEL MAPS. EXHIBIT A pg 1 of 2 3-177 BUC[LEY 110 bm' - (N� . m y � Hip 4 1�1I.yI W�1 1 A/I JL,./r Yp' PNII.62 W J r • P _ 4y'(4 m U N y Y•`8 x tr ■'Fi v,:m ' m a V yu 7)1.07 ~ 770 6 6• D V a � a `f�� rro 1. o•/e•W L{aµ � . m N� O m N \W , � �•. cbDl N � y LIo.tS P , E o ; BVI Silas aIppVN H ; Z A w1 m � > ` T W y W /Oi.OY A A m A t m fif.ef oLL lo• NO 4f*IJ w,.s- 4r� ��s'� W m� N1y1t• �' 3 WJ + -J- -' - — -`- esT co V0) ro �i 4 w 1 _ • 1 0 `� �,• W .ttO. I•. i i Dy w ___ - u1 N uu1; yN I fef __________ __________ _____i_______________y -- W a Sar T 1 /_I_L_._fi______________ V d O V • 1 V G m Wnp � m V C) � CD N n I r 90SSf_________' b 4 O am ______- '_ N AO � b N C 1 ; ,oaY.N fIY.IJ 1J ,ifY.LT Nb No•s{-SIAM ya /. M.—es Na•/a•/!•M m lW` p W . S �