HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/04/2000, 3 - PACIFIC BELL, A&R WELDING, AND FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATION: 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/E Y _
council. MecfmDw
4/4/00
acEnaa Report 3
C I TY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, ity Attorney
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 RECOM ENDATION
(a) Re-introduce 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, and repeal
Resolution 9023 (2000 series).
(c) Approve,ratify 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
At the March 14, 2000 City Council meeting, Councilman Ewan presented a communication
item requesting a reconsideration of this item because of a potential conflict of interest. (Please
see attached Communication.) In response,the remainder of the Council voted to reconsider the
matter at the next available meeting which would meet noticing requirements.
Also attached for your information is the original March 7, 2000 Staff Report. The Council
should rehear this matter as if it were a new item,without the participation of Councilman Ewan.
The CAO Recommendation has been modified slightly to repeal the resolution adopted on March
7, and to ratify the Mayor's execution of the pre-annexation agreement.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Resolution
2. Communication Item(3/14/00 City Council Meeting)
3. March 7,2000 Staff Report
3-1
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, 18&99,and 206-99)
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission and City Council have held hearings on
the proposed annexations on January 26,2000,March 7,2000, and April 4,2000,
respectively; and
WHEREAS,the City Council introduced on April 4,2000 Ordinance No. 1366
(2000 Series),approving 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(1V1)
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.
3. The proposed annexations will promote the health,safety, and welfare of
persons living or worldng in the vicinity of the annexation area
Attachment 1 2
Resolution No. (2000 Series)
Page 2
contiguous properties covering approximately 12 acres. They are located on the north
side of Suburban Road(196 Suburban Road); on the south side of Tank Farm Road(205
Tank Farm Road); and on the north side of Tank Fane Road(204 Tank Farm Road).
They are assigned Assessor's Parcel Numbers of 076-352-033, 076-352-032, and 076-
351-042 respectively, as shown in the annexation maps attached as Exhibit B and legally
described in attached Exlubit C.
SECTION 3: Council Recommendation. The City.Council recommends that the
Local Agency Formation Commission of San Luis Obispo County approve the proposed
annexations subject to property owners' compliance with City requirements regarding
public improvements,in accordance with California Government Code Section 56844 et
SECTION 4: Implementation. The City Clerk shall forward a copy of this
resolution and prezoning actions,the mitigated Negative Declarations of environmental
impact, and all pertinent supporting documents to the Local Agency Formation
Commission.
SECTION 5: Resolution No. 9023 (2000 Series)is hereby repealed.
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
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney Jeff Jorgensen
3-3
communication
MEETING AGENDA
March 14, 2000 DATE "=ffEM 9C_
TO: City Council
FROM: John Ewan ��tix°"�'/� •
SUBJECT: Pacific Bell Annexation
At the close of our meeting of March 7,2000,I realized that I might have voted on an item for
which I have a conflict of interest. After consulting with legal counsel, and reviewing my
family's investment portfolio,I have confirmed that my vote on Item 3—Pacific Bell Annexation
was in conflict with our family's retirement investment holdings.
While I have tried to be diligent about refraining from voting on items that may have even the
appearance of a conflict of interest, this item slipped by. Our investment holding is in SBC, the
parent company of Pacific Bell, and as such appears to constitute a direct involvement.
I am requesting that Council reconsider this item at the earliest possible date. I will refrain from
further discussion.
Please accept my apologies to the Council and to the applicant for any unnecessary hardship.
Thank you.
EUNCIL
JE:ss ❑F
C3 F
0P,I.T
Ll❑UTIL C
ll
0 PERS DIR
f. !nf h 212v►
F
0RK
Attachment 2
counck Mach 7 2
j agenda uEpout 3"�
C I T.Y OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Arnold.Jonas,Community Development Director
Prepared By: Whitney McIlvaine,Associate Planner
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. (AN XIR/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
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
3-5
Attachment:.3
Pacific Bell,A&R Welding, _1 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 Fane Road)
Representatives: Pults and Associates(A&R Welding)
Cannon and Associates(Farm 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 Farm 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 farming. 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. (ANNXIR/ER 204-99)
All three sites are relatively flat. Surrounding land uses include agriculture and other
service-commercial and manufacturing operations.
3®6
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 .
. 3-7
ORDINANCE NO. (2000 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO PREZONE
APPROXIMATELY 43 ACRES AT 196 SUBURBAN ROAD
MANUFACTURING;APPROXIMATELY 2.9 ACRES AT 205 TANK FARM
ROAD SERVICE-COMMERCIAL; AND APPROXIMATELY 4.9 ACRES AT 204
TANK FARM ROAD SERVICE-COMMERCIAL
(R/ANNX/ER: 213-991188-99,AND 206-99)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January
26, 2000 and recommended prezoning the proposed annexation sites Service Commercial
(C-S)and Manufacturing(M)as shown in Exhibit A;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 in accordance with
Section 65800 et. seq. of the California Govemment Code; and
WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the change have been
evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
City Environmental Guidelines.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines that the projects' mitigated
Negative Declarations (ER 213-99, 188-99, and 206-99) adequately address the potential
significant environmental impacts of the proposed projects, and reflect the independent
judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said mitigated Negative
Declarations.
SECTION 2. The City Council makes the following findings:
1. Prezoning the annexation area Service Commercial (GS)and Manufacturing(M),
as shown on attached Exhibit A, is consistent with the General Plan land use
designation of Services and Manufacturing;
2. Prezoning the annexation area Service Commercial (C-S)and Manufacturing(M),
as shown on attached Exhibit A, is consistent with the intended use and location
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
3-8
Ordinance No. (2000 Series)
Pacific Bell,A&R Weldiz6and 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 Service-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 names of Council
members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final
passage, in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said city. This
ordinance shall go into effect upon the date of final action by the City Council on the
annexation.
INTRODUCED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo
at its meeting held on the day of , 2000, on motion of
seconded by ,and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ty o ey J f J ensen
3-9
`�r��Ilillllllll
EM
I all
immul
vigil III
W WN
Urban - - - - -
- Airport
. ' : .
U 11%1
ie�4,1 I fit W4
MLmiijP�It�JMJLW]r-j IMP
- r_u r - • • • � � � 1� - > r Imo,
1
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.
3. The proposed annexations will promote the health, safety, and welfare of
persons living or working in the vicinity of the annexation area
3-11
Pacific Bell,A&R Weldin .Farm Supply.Annexations
LAFCo Resolution
Page 2
SECTION 2: Annexation Area Described. The annexations shall consist of three
contiguous properties covering approximately 12 acres. They are located on the north
side of Suburban Road (196 Suburban Road); on the south side of Tank Farm Road (205
Tank Farm Road); and on the north side of Tank Fane Road (204 Tank Farm Road).
They are assigned Assessor's Parcel Numbers of 076-352-033, 076-352-032, and 076-
351-042 respectively, as shown in the annexation maps attached as Exhibit B and legally
described in attached Exhibit C.
SECTION 3: Council Recommendation. The City Council recommends that the
Local Agency Formation Commission of San Luis Obispo County approve the proposed
annexations subject to property owners' compliance with City requirements regarding
public improvements, in accordance with California Government Code Section 56844 et
seq-
SECTION 4: Implementation. The City Clerk shall forward a copy of this
resolution and prezoning actions, the mitigated Negative Declarations of environmental
impact, and all pertinent supporting documents to the Local Agency Formation
Commission.
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
ATTEST:
City Clerk Lee Price
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
orn J Jo
3-12
�r,-�Il llllrlilll l ll�
r
..
Farm . .
AM Weldinosoon
_ _gnu �� ■
T1
/rCity Limit ine
• _ -rve Line
— . . -
• - I n C • • _
a
w
Sol$ d SIP
S I $ C •mss !
Zm 6 :Va gQ
1 m H Et aQ°4 34o I
W �JdAA ® 1
I m K Y.. d mo hC
w 7s a J. S$�•
10A
CS
a E
o T g "cam I
-
1 ai z rca ' gQ
i
.�J
1---- ------------------
Tulvot_ o -3
:—
3F
m0 IL
� 5 �
= "-
US a aE ly
i
NJO $ha>a:
on z
' m� RIC hsa �a
1 'm al h " m Iva��
z So Baa
OZ ..'w
I I
= J
e
1 h � is
`Y o ,SLY6L III,IL.LL685 " h a
F o � b€a2aa
n �
1 o e
s 7
O
I4
:wZ 3
1 erg
I d
0
1
I
3.IZ.lL68N --_
�YY Y
daw.an NYS p MN=
w
1 °�J 1 v F• 1 1rwY .
smiV
am �Nvemms
w
to 1 <w 1 ■� I e
I GJ O p
am i700IB
1 1
ExtMBR B 1 3-14
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ANNEXATION MAP
B M
s 3
NC/N/TY MAP F PARCEL 1 PARCEL Z
Ib
/ cIt
38 PM 32 CO 84-054
fo.af TANKf
FARM ROAD
�' NeuJRA _ �m f fIY9'I A/—I
All
I�
I1 /
i I yfroacwum a...r®rn �j .
�.CyfpR¢9f.frK lu.c Ot' :;11
M@
1
1
5 1if ac .L
t[mat I
I � 10E�Oh
[61YE Off(KJ WI�Y
f40°�..fCL COY BgmMI I
J 7'
I
an-•�.w co-e.-asa Ae-a,-�f :1 5 .
„I /
lVmv rec.nw 5I
�A
1 _
all
A1fi
110 0.
a13
1
h b
GRAPHIC SCAIEMOP
1 1" C7
. 1
,/faa.Y76,\•�� ue CORS A-J"
1
. I
1
� r..'tet• S(/8flR8AN A'AAD t
boORatrYes aaaOes ���—��—�
IOY m n.aYf r
r.s asa f•w
t®fY.o
3-15
EXHIBIT B 2
I I
a4
,� ► Iii I _ I
I
eE lil a
IINI ZI � 1
I� 1 m m r rf I
20"I=M.
Z ti y I
R09 I RS 73 I
OC)
.4 aiD 1 D Zn
m
Q1Y R SM Iib 08®0
1 L. "C"rr or ` l/Jmi�Yltii L .. yl
mwx R aw+wa o®o
1 � o
. 1 1
r�
4 55 I 9$
ia?,
4 G 1 moi. nCDO
ocm mr Cmp I
ISR 1 S
Zsg f" r N 1 mn9 Oy I
22
SHm C C
I SGOM5WE 660.28• (R7)
¢"c-
E182
R or
ciz
w
m
—
a
3� yF.r,• ; N00W50'N 66028 (RI)
r; z
Y's OF
a 1 r
II
I O
m
i —m
I �c
.a
"z
E55 e.; I I -•I
r 1 1 I z
<
• I I
1
ra-
EXHIBIT B 3
3-16
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-IL &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 001 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(Suuburban Road);
thence,leaving the existing city limit boundary,along the southerly line of said 50.00 foot wide
road(Suburban Road),N 89051'21"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 coma of said Lot 25
and the southeast comer 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 69 N 00014112"W,537.23 feet,to the north east coma
of that parcel of land conveyed to Pacific Telephone&Telegraph Company by Grant Deed filed
as Doc.No.51416,recorded October 31, 1.978,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 00'19230"W,
450.06 feet,to the north line of said Lot 6,being the southerly line of that 20.00 foot wide road
(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.I..Beckett on February 7, I907 in Book 1,at
Page 92 of Licensed Surveys in the office of the Recorder for said county,
EJiWcI PWlof2 3-17
thence,along the northerly prolongation of herem above described last course,N 00° 19' 30"W;
42.00 feet to the northerly boundary of that strip of land offered for dedication for mad
improvements designated according to Parcel Map No. CO-84-054,recorded October 29, 1985,
filed in Book 38,Page 32 of Parcel Maps,in the office of the Recorder for said county,
thence, along said northerly boundary;S 890 59' 51"W, 30.00 feet to a point on the existing city
limit boundary;
thence, along existing city limit boundary, S 00019'30"E,42.00 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing-4.7 total acres.
End Description
Prepared by.
Daniel S.Hutchinson;LS 5139 (expires 6/30/03)
Date:
aoollsnepLdoe
Pne 2 of z 3-18
FEB.22.2060 a:19AM PITS & ASSOCIATES NO-SW P.1/2
2-10-00
AM WELDIM ANNEUTION
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
A parcel of land in Secdonl0, 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 24-26-31, North half of"Lots W 18-
23-30 and the South portion of Lot N° 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 portion 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 89°59'51" East,
1418.53 feet to a point on the e>asting boundary line of said City, said point also
being the northwest comer of said Lot 6;
THENCE along said City boundary line, South 00019'30" 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 panel;
THENCE along the south line of said parcel, North B9051'21" 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. Norttr 00°14'12"
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;
Pave 1 of 2
EXHW C 2 3-19
FEB.22.2800 8:19AM PI'S & ASSOCIATES N0.308 P.22
THENCE along the north line of said parcel and said Tank Farm Road, South
89°59'51°West, 295.51 feet;
THENCE South 00019'300 East, 62.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
CONTAINING; 3.33 acres of land, more or less.
L AND
q�w K s`� Prepared by or under the supervision of:
tom' 9/Jo/01 *.
srSTf Andrew K. Holmes
L.S. 4428 Uc. Exp. 9/30101
11 .00128
siolegals/ahsigannex.doc
Page 2 of 2
3-20
FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATION
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ANNEXATTON
Land Description
All that parcel of land in the County of San Luis Obispo,State of California described as follows:
Commencing 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
trap 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 lime of said Lot 6,N 89°56153"E,25954 feet to the southwest comer of Parcel l
of Parcel Map C0484-054,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 lime 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 00008'50"W,20.00 to the southeast comer of
said Parcel 2;
thence,along the easterly line of said Parcel 2,N 00°08'50"W,66028 feet to the northeast comer of
said Parcel 2;
thence,along the north line 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. 52 total acres.
End Description
Prepared by
Daniel S.Hutchinson,IS 5139(expires 6/30/03)
Date:
EYJiB r c s 3-21
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 TANK FARM ROAD
(ANNX/R/ER 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
WIEREAS, 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 (M),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 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
3-22
Resolution for Denial No. (2000.5eries)
Pacific Bell,A&.R Welding and Farm Supply
Page 2
AT`T'EST:
City C1e&Le-to ce
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attomey Jeff.Jorgensen
3=23
1 �
MITIGATION
AGREEMENT S
. 3mU
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 Paei€e-Re'Fton
the ZIP day of FE&U AA�4 , 2000. The following measures are included
in the project to mitigate potential a�nvironmental 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 shall be required as pari 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-
Arnold
epartmentArnold B. Jonas icicle L. Berry
Community Development Director Director. Corpora a ReEstate Transaction:
Pacific Bell Telepho Company n--7
1. Pacific Bell Telephone Company 3-25
Applicant Acceptance of Mitigation Measures
Project: 188-99
205 Tank Farm Road
This agreement is entered into,�iy and between the City of San Luis Obispo and David
Erbstoesser on the 7 day of 6� a 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. 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.
3-26
ER 206-99
Mitigation Agreement
Page 2
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 projectwill a scheduled for public
review and hearing until this signed 'ginal is returned to e C mmunity Development
Department
Arnold B. Jonas lm---Brib ck, neral Manager or
Community Development Director Farm Suply Company
3-2
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
1:1 7* day of 6tjli , 2000. The following measures are included in
the project to mitigate potential advenfe 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 panting 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.
3-28
ER 188-99
Mitigation Agreement
Page 2
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
Arnold B. Jonas D vid Erbstoesser
Community Develop nt Director A & R Welding
3-2J
PLANNING CON IIS:SION
STAFF REPORT
3-30
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMIVIISSION STAFF REPORT rTEM+'�,5
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 arecontiguous,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
3-31
Planning Commision Meeting 126/00
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 Fane Road to the northeast of A&R Welding,
is vacant and has been used for fanning. 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.
3-32
Planning Commision Meeting 1126100
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
3-33
Planning Commision Meeting 1126100
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.
Prezoning/Land 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."
3-34
Planning Commision Meeting 1/26100
Airport Area Anncxations: 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
3-35
Planning Commision Meeting 126/00
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
3-36
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.
RECOMY[ENDATION
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
3-37
Planning Commision Meeting 126/00
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
3-38
UE «•U 41
SOCIAL SECURITY M o y = "
P OFFICE 3 O � V San Blas o
010
' \ @ o ala Val
Road � c�,t.i
o
Prado Road
n Luis •C z° E o
A, t�
Boo etfi Dr.
BORDER
kQ �¢, o
i,a CO
t y
iPrk ca Granada rive u)
��o0
m� s Meissner arse Cook
>� Hind Ln. {{ Business
Park
. ' . Farm
C?J c°j -40---Supply
Site
w
d 4fa�Ip 't Tank Farm Road
A, --= A&R Welding
Pradirasa O� hort St.
Dr. J o '-' - I Site
huparrosa dr. U
-OP% Los Verb s y Sub rban Road !�_
-
„ m PacBell -
0, o
1' c-
s Oso* I e
alley ��%%a C f o
F 0
o `J 7M&SSOQI e 2
HILDREN'S SCHOOL
m %sem d Not to Scale`
s
4
Existing San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of:
A&R Welding,Farre Supply,
and PacBell
Concurrently-Proposed Annexation Areas----..---- To: City of San Luis Obispo
MCONCuRRENTLY-PROPOSED
Site Locations
ASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS
tM„M EA*ftpmSS'2f1M 3-39
PACIFIC .BELL ANNEXATION
ENVIRONMENTAL
INITIAL STUDY
ER 213-99
3-40
` ��I 1111'11mI111,1'11'1I1I
III� cityluis o4 ��►1'1
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
ER 213-99
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 isproposed 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
® T�City ourucio�� ��inelude the disabled in ffiI of its services, a� 3 41
�s1-7a1a
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
MXThere 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 Departmimt of Fish and Game for review and comment.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
1 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 (1) .has been adequately analyzed in an.earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
2 3-42
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 3-43
.Issues and Supporting Informat. Sources so01= Pmem Powdalb' I=Than No
Signifi=t SiVM=t Significant Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation ��on Impaec
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 pian 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 3-44
Issues and Supporting Informat.. Sources Swr= Po=L Porimitially Lcislb= No
signi6cM Signffi ant stdfiart bv=
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation nitip
nnfigation
kicorpmw
♦ 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 3-45
Issues and Supporting Informats. Sources Soutar Pottau par�lly Isss73aa . No
Significant Significant siguifteant Impact
LSstta Unkss Itopaa
ER 213-99 Pack Bell Annexation mitigation
to fated
♦ 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 Deification 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. 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 urbandevelopment 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 3-46
Issues and Supporting Informat,. .Sources Sources potent. r less Than No
significant. sigaiftmtst significant Impact
ksttunless Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation mitigation
kworporated
- 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.
ater;B. Reducing usage of City water in existing development so that there will be no net increase in long-
3-47
` 1
Issues and Supporting Informati, Sources POW1211r less Than No
Significant sigmificant Sigoific= Imp=
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation hom unim
mitigation
hompmawd
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 Solid Waste Capacrty
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 3-48
Issues-and Supporting Informal. . Sources SOW= Ptnmt. PODm°My L=Thm I No
Sigaificam Significant Signifiant Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation tss u .
mitigation
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 _T 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 ex ose eo le to potential im cts involvin :
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 3-49
Issues and Supporting Informati, Sources Sow= tic Po md* lrss Tlurt No
signirnant Significant Significant Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issas Unkss IMP-o
mitigation
1ncMpWjtcd
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
0 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 waters stem 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 3-50
Issues and Supporting Informati. Sources Sow= Menti Potetctiay I=Than No
Significant Sivdficmt Sigoifi=t Itty= -
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation lava tlni= "
mitigation
Earn sated
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 vernalpool? 1,10 x
e) Wildlife dispersal or mi ration corridors? 1,10 x
CONCLUSION: Not significaht. 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 proposa1:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans7 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 Gncluding, 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?
'' 3-51
Issues and Supporting Inform tt,.. Sources So== patent, Poomd* Less Than No
Signifi=l Significant Significant hnpact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issnes Ufiga Impa<c
mitigation
Wcorporaw
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
ovemment services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? N13
x
b) Police protection? x
c) Schools?d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? x
e) Other overnmental services? 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 3-52
Issues-and Supporting Informatn... Sources swros Paimm Pam y o
si&ficmt sipia=t significant hnpw
Lanes unless bnpaet
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation tmpgatia
in
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the follovidng 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? 7, 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.
E.isting 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 the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? x
13 3-53
Issues and Supporting Informati,.. Sources soutca Pam= Potentially Less Thast No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation issues. ualas Impact
tmtigatioa
lacca tated
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? x
c) Create light orglare? 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 theproposal:
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
oalsZ
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
3-54
Issues and Supporting Informatit,.. Sources sources rotmeauy o
significant significant significant Impact
ER 213-99 Pacific Bell Annexation Issues Unless Impact
mirigation
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 3-55
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,
2109.3, 321094, 21151; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App: 3d 296 (1988); Leonofff v.
Monterey Board of Supervisor;, 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 #
799511.28
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
3-56
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 3-57
JE
SOCIAL [L .;
I SOCIAL SECURITY M
OFFICE ■ O v+� San Bias O
o N = p ala
,� P
01 Road (wt.)
Prado "'Road'11=
1 Luis
�`San ti
<v Boner Dr.
BORDER o
Mo L eIC6
Park ca Granada rive cn
;. Meissner <:. a e
Cook
Hind Ln. Business
Pask
�eQ ti
Farm
Supply
9 Site
Mar ' I Tank Farm Road
s Pradea�r J,`� ,Short St. C...° A&R Welding
Ofn jrj5Site
huparrosa fir• ar. O �j
Verides y Sub rban Road
.l Los es, c Pac.Bell -
ite—"—
s Oso j .
alley //Ta L,r 1 N
o
o HTESSORI 2
LDTIEN'S SCHOOL
Not to Sca
m
i $
Edsting San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of:
ASR Welding,Farm Supply,
Concurrently-Proposed Annexation Areas and PacBell
.00 e............................................. To:City of San Luis Obispo
CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED
��n�n ANNEXATION AREAS Site Locations
ASSOCIATES
SM„MEddft.PUM12MM 3-58
MARGARITA \ \\
YNR! \' \\\\•.\\\.' '.\ ■ `\\
AREA
"^..�'�� c _ ■ —.�_—gym
max`�a _ Q — ___ _ .,�—s4•r.,..— �. -
-_--�� -_HIQUERA
COMMERCE
IN
f
NI
IN
IN 'IN
47 N\ '
IN -_
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-Iike setting
a park setting. under a master plan.
annoYl CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED City of San Luis Obispo
MASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS General Plan
Deskjnabons
9eo1W E> omss,tivss 3-59
--
■ NINON
r � _
Farm Supply
(Prezone C-S)
MIN
MIN
MINE
bog
�1,.�,�I 11111111111
`�1�14== `` ■
L 111
11= .11 11 ■
City Limit Line
Urban
1: :1111 "
"
Reserve Li -
1
I® SUBURBAN STREET
Q < '
I � z
® ® r J K
W00
m
LOU
J
0 N Z � U
Zw ` a D W ON
m (_� F- mm
K
7V=i N
�.
oz
� J
z
m I ' N
' 6
o ;
Ix
t
a
A. �O
<Z
zo
f~A J_
� Z 7
W Q
Y .
HITH
I 11111
, � {R I
ui
Cc
1
m h
L.1
U OrU 1 1 W
a o O U
O -j z O
U~ U
H
W� J ppW z
U OW O
li V 3 OW
o O Z j
Ix
U O 1 (7vz
U z Y O
OI I I I .I I l I I X H Q
wl
X I C L W F O
CL J J
O_ W
N IY
W Lai
�-wmmww=mr-mft-mr-uft�-mor-ma-mmmommum
� � s
N � /In; �
X-
1 n o
o �
� = a
o'a c a X��x�-� X04
rz p x e S
y M
v� f. � � � �aS t •
z m °O
X x x X
g�3
� a =
n
3 ;R e e�
r 9p
-�T-xx— I i
'00 = �:
6 �x
G x
v'7 x xrlt
x i
X x t
X l'
i
V! Vl O
Z Z rrn
g CO CD 000
® yD CA C' ��xl ! � I X
OF -x -L� LJ� a nX rx, x x
Vi> '0 0 ren -0 ;D x
H .� o\
O a o
oz O-o
Z 7-
>
C=,
z
-> Z I. O
9'
July 26, 1999
Jul 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
3-63
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.
HVIPACT 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(8'1 to your easterly property line. A
3-64
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 $27412 $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.
3-65
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, tnmk 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 neap 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 Angust 15, 1999
Processing Fees $5,991 $109719
3-66
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
3-67
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 Citystandards.
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.
3-68
Fire Prevention Bureau
Memorandum
To: Whitney Mclivain
From: Darren Drake, Fre 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 Caldomia Fre 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 Fre Code.
Fire Hydrants:
Fre hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the Caldomia Fre Code.
The location, number and type of hydrants connected to the City system shall be determined
using Appendix III-B of the Cal'rfomia Fre Code and the approved City Engineering
Standards.
Miscellaneous:
Prior to annexation a facility fire and fife-safety inspection shall be conducted 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 rde-.safety properties of the facilities and operations.'
3-69
I
crty of san lugs osispo
utilrtiEs 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.
3-70
SAN LUIS Owspo COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING
VICTOR HOLANDA.AICP
DIRECTOR
BRYCE TINGLE.AICP
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
ELLEN CARROLL
EN)VIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
BARNEY MCCAY
CHIEF BURDINC 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. 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
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER SAN LWs OBISPO CALIFORNIA 93408 (805)781-5600 1-800-834-4636
EMAIL: ipcopingoslonet.org FAX: (805)781-1242 WEBSITE: http://www.sionet.org/vv/ipcoping
3-71
A&R WELDING ANNEXATION
ENV IRONIVIENTAL
INITIAL STUDY
ER 188-99
3-72
cityO sAn lois 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
The City of San Luis Qbispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services.pro6�and 803-73
3
® Teleotznmunications Devke for the Deat(605)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 Guality Public Services
Transportation and Utilities and Service
Circulation Systems
r� There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects
IAC 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:
1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there X
will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described.on a
attached sheets have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project May have a significant effect on the environment, and a
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at leas
one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable lega
standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis a
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' or is 'Potentiall
Significant Unless Mitigated.' An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
2 3-74
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, then
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1) hav
been analyzed in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (2) have been avoided o
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impose
upon the proposed project.
January 28, 2000
'gnat 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 3-75
Issues and Supporting Informat.. . Sources sources Pmt. Potentially Less [hai No
Significant si nifieant significant Impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation Laves miditigation impact
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 lane
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 consistent
with this land use designation the site must be zoned either Service-Commercial (C-S) or Manufacturing W.
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 sit
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:.
♦ 72 Airport Land Use Plan
Development should be permitted only if it is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Lan
Use Plan. Prospective buyers of property which is subject to airport influence should be so informed.
4 3-76
Issues and Supporting Informal. . Sources stnmea Potatt rotrntiallr iess7ltm No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Unless
ER 188-99 AM Welding Annexation Imns mitigation Impact
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 th
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 areasas sit
amenities and to protect resources, consistent with the Open Space Element. In addition, wildlif
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 th
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 fo
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 fo
the site should.be prepared, showing that circulation, water and other utility, and drainag
proposals will be compatible with"future annexation and urban development.
B. Any development within the urban reserve approved by the County prior to annexation shoul
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 concurren
with any additional urban development in the Airport Area.
5 3-77
.Issues and Supporting Informal. Sources Souris Pomp. Potentially Less That No
Significant Significant significant Impact
ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation 1ss UNess lmpaa
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 specificplan 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 ope
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 urba
development. Topography poses no issue since the site is essentially flat. Needed capital facilities an
funding are outlined in the attached tetter from the Community Development Director to the applicant. Thir
site is partially developed. The applicant has submitted a development plan for the vacant portion of the site
6 3-78
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Som Potent Potctnialty Loess Than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Issues mitis Impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation
mitigation
Incorporated
The pre-annexation agreement states that property owners and their successors will agree to suppo
formation of an assessment district if that is the approach adopted by the City for funding the specific pla
and infrastructure improvements. Services and frontage improvements will be addressed through th
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 Ci
and County land use plans.
♦ 1.13.3 Required Plans Land in any of the following annexation areas may be developed only after th
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 fo
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 th
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 whe
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 Jul
1994, in accordance with the City's water management policies. The water management policies me
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 i
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 th
applicant retrofit existing plumbing fixtures throughout the city to save twice the amount of water that sit
development is anticipated to use.
CONCLUSION: Less than significant. Connection to city water and future site development under the
7 3-79
Issues and Supporting Informat.. Sources Somoes PotcnL fbrentially Las Than tvo
Significant Significant Sigtific m Impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation Imes Unlrts k"d
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 Ope
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 spa
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 i
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 City
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 Californian
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
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%.
3-80
Issues and Supporting Infonnat.. . Sources sources Potent. a«errtially LessTdan xo
Significant Significant Significant Impart
Unless
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation Issues mitigation' Impact
fr=rporated
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 fo
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 3-81
Issues and Supporting Informat,_.. Sources sources Potent. Potentially Less Than No
signifimt signirtcmt Signifieaat Impact
ER 188-99 A&R WeldingAnnexation Uelss
mitigation
[n=porated
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 act
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? F7 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 Il
microns or less in diameter) air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non-attainmer
10 3-82
Issues and Supporting Informal . Sources Sources PO0an Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
issues Unless impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation 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 majot 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 encourag
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
" 3-83
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources sortroes Potent rotauiaily L=Than No
significant significant significant Mpaet
Imes Unless ll
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation mitigation
6uoiyormed
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.
S. 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 energ
conservation goals through enforcement of. the California Energy Code which establishes energ
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 conservin
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 j x
grass or trees?
12 3-84
Issues and Supporting Informa- . Sources So== Potent. Fmentially Less Than I No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Unles
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation Issues mitigation Impact
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 pose
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 ahered
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 wil
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 ahemtions 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 3-85
Issues and Supporting Infonnat: . Sources Sotuoes Potent Potent ally o
Significant Sipificam Significant impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation ISSS`CS Unfrtinigaticmless Impact
Incorporated
g) Local or regional water supplies? 1 I
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 additions
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 pe
person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption durin
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 well
water for landscape irrigation to reduce demand for city water.
14 3-86
Issues and Supporting Informat. Sources Sources Potent eotentially I=Ttm No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation tsstus m�� Impar
mitigation
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 eriminate 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 z
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ('Cumulatively
considerable' means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
15 . 3-87
Issues and Supporting Informat.. . Sources sources Potem Poummly las Than No
significMd Sigdficmn Signifieem Impact
ER 188-99 A&R Welding Annexation issues Unless ''°Pa"
•tncorporated
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 3-88
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) (2
(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
S. 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
3-89
Project description
Soil contamination map
Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation
City Department Comments
19. MITIGATION MEASURES/MONMORING 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 3-90
Project description
Soil contamination map
Letter from Arnold Jonas outlining applicable fees in the event of annexation
City Department Comments
19. M_ITIGATION MEASURESIMONITORING 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.
'$ 3-91
J� el
�.
NESP �� - .__�_• ----
—_-� J
W ��\/
JRBA4-
Via"niV Wip
N 205 .TANK FARC, -
0® � R 1 8R-�9
A 3-92
MARGARITA
AREA
EF9
COMMERCE
Fa
te---
\�_---_---
-7.... .......
..........
-_-\._ _ _=--SSI 2_ _ \ '�••. :\ \,\ \\ \ \\\ \
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
sASaymon ANNEXATIONAREAS General Plan DesignationsSOCIATES
9W111S3Exhbft4MM112MW
3-93
EMN
�1r��Illill�llllllll
A&R Welding
MIN
Ir11011111
1111§11111mmmm\�� ~
1111 �1111� `� ■
City Li—m't Line
L� 111 I///I IIS// ' • ■
-
G : 1111
' Urbaerve Line
m
a —� I W ppp
a_z a �_
_ g Z
0
00 lJ
4
r J + � Q QQ
a0
itU .0 V VV
C_� O n�
1 a v0
Ka w Ca Q
x \� 11 0
9 � a C1 V � m a Vm @a
x x x xx- i s s s_ g �` YO c Q
U O
a �a ZN UN OO
O <5 O �
000 W J Z
-xr F 1 O Q
o tan tan
I �
I m �
t
c � � LILS�JL_L
e o d
x
vo
: V n
o _ z—
001
_x —x_y_�
G C F,-x J
V W
V
:—X-X—x x I Z m z 6�
` yY DOE 0 E
B "sX
UFO.
W 4 WO
n b C
o
9 _� _oo
0
O os
—x
3.95
Ster�elz D.Pults A AsaaMates
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.ff. 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 comer. 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.
Mtbitectwe.Rlatr>&S 6Craplocs
3450 Broad S1ree1-stale 106
SMU&Oftpo,CA 93401 3-96
(805)541-5604
P=(805)5414371
E)
TT I s
i
g x a a SEC
€ P g
=0• i�S== t}t tii �
- : si3rt
;
ll
t•; a eirt fi fq m
3 ;E� til tis N �.
C
oa -n
U n >
p ao
D
i = o rn
a
y Z
• A
A
H
� s
Irk r
r �� W3-97� ts
o
x a
0 V
H � O
a r
s ' �
� r
� a
� a -
'� x
I
TANK FARM ROAD
. � w�•f•frf fw•.• dal
Ltd
I ,^1 �
II" F::9 1
7
u
• •�'�^i ti Ryy'Yn'�a � s N
3 L i eC^S�'._ +i w_;:;._':•s_fir.:
C b
e �
•' n � � � � i � � �c= i�jt�I •'I�':
i f
II�� I
!III�IlI�I .i =
e
__ � Ji lilliii!li!Ik ❑ - � -
FEE �____
_ - ME
h-
_ j �P IITiI�I IIS _ ��VIIV II uVlll _ . �I�.
1A/'
K
li
G�
TANK FARM ROAD
we•vn•[ sur
G
;
♦7
g,
I �
r
x
0
O
O •�
wraaa sur __
100
� gg
' 8 �}i� } Sa.eD.Pmrali+..dAaxims
.T
G
- o I
e 9 �
r i
a
z
I
i
.kr n
II
I
I I
O
O
A
kig r
(}pii S}mvD.PdgAliLdMedrsc
I
iU
city Of SAn tuis oaspo
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. CA 93401-3249
June 21, 1999
David Erbstoesser
A&R Welding Supply
205 Tank Farm 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 my of Sen Luis Ablspo is oom0n911ed to include the disabled In all ofIts services.programs a"�P'°i 2
Teleoo ..... ions()evlee for the Deaf(B<15)7a+-74111
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.
D4PACT 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.
3-103
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 Ana lift stations fee
($158.07 per acre x 1.76 acres) S 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 $ 39520
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
3-104
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 @$15,538 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
3-105
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 ely,
ow1
Arnold B. Jonas
Community Development Director
c: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
3-106
Fire Prevention
l �-
Memorandum
To: Whitney Mdivain
From: Darren Drake, Fire Marshal U f
Date: December 2, 1999
Re: 205 Tank Farm Rd.—Tank Farm Industrial Complex
`Fre Department Access:
Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the California 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 Fre 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 Ill-A of the California Fre Code.
'Fire Hydrants:
Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903.4 of the Cardomia Fire 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.
Fre Protection Systems and Equipment
Fre protection systems shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code and California
Building Code as amended by the City.
Fre Safety During Construction:
Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Article
87 of the California Fire Code.
Environmental Assessment
This proposed property and development is in dose proximity to underground oil pipelines
and areas that have had a history of contamination. It is recommended that all development
within Unocal's Tank Fara Pipeline comply with the.following:
3-107
I. 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. 1474
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 ('de-safety properties of the facilities and operations.
Notre: Items with an asterisk apply to the new and existing facilities.
•Pie 2
3-108
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.
3-109
SAID LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
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 Airports 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 1 -
Ted Bench
Airport Land Use Commission
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER SAN. LUIS OBISPO - CALIFORNIA 93408 (805)781-56L�-11O 6
EMAIL: ipcoping@slonet.org • FAX: (805)781-1242 WEBSITE: http://www.slonet.org/vv/tpcaping
FARM SUPPLY ANNEXATION
ENVIRONMENTAL
INITIAL STUDY
ER 206-99
x
.3:4g-1
luis oBispo
city . of sAn
Sim990 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 Mcllvaine,
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 .
Teto" 8 )�41a 'e°i, seg . 3-112
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
1 X 1 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
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 'Potential)
2 3-113
Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ther
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
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 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 3-114
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sourea Potent Pountally I=-Hiatt No
Significant Siptificant Significant Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation Issues ,,,anion Impact
Incotporated
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 policie: 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)?
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. Thel
development plan shows a storage yard, barn storage, and parking along the north and eastern sides of th
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 airportoperations. 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 th
policy of City.Council to process interim annexations in the airport area while simultaneously working towar
the goal of preparing a specific plan for this area.
Governing Policies:
3-115
Issues and Supporting Informat. Sources Sonuea Pow• Potentially I=Thu No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Ism Unkss Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation n,iugation
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 cred'
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 pa
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 3-116
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources Sources Pocenc DIY Las Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation 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 alon
Tank Farm Road.
♦ 7.8 Specific Plan
The City will prepare a specific plan for land uses, habitat protection, circulation, utilities, and drainag
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 maintai
the greenbett, 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 sour
of the City's urban reserve line. The City shall set fee levels that would be appropriate in-lieu of ope
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 3-117
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources soiucrs Locant. Posh' I=Tt No
significant Signifte" Significant Impact
ER 206-99 Farm.Supply Annexation Issucs unless Impact
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 demerit
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 remai
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 refle
topography, needed capital facilities and funding, open space objectives, and existing and proposed lan
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 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 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'
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.
3-118
Issues and Supporting Informat.. .. Sources Somm Ponnt. r°tanislly Les Thm No
Significant Sigaifieant Significant Impact
Issues Unlez Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation
Incorporated
♦ 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 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 retrofi
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. 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 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 t
city water, the applicant must develop a water allocation, consistent with the City's Water Allocatio
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 fo
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 unde
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. Policie
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 th
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 nevy
development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtai
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 facilitie
needed to serve it.
8 3-119
Issues and Supporting Informat._ . Sources Sources Potent. Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant SignificantIssues U
Impau
ER.206-99 Farm Supply Annexation nu!ess on Impact
Inem"rated
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 wit
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 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 Californian
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 recyclin
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 are:
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? 11 x
3-120
Issues and Supporting Informat,_. Sources Soarces Poteno rotemially Las rnan No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impart
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation
lacmporated
b) Seismic ground shaking? 1 x
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 x
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard7 x
e) Landslides or muciflows? 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 1 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 th
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 physica
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 sit
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 proje
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 wate
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 tc
to 3-121
Issues and Supporting Informat.- Sources Sowcm Poteft Potentially . Less Than No
Significant S40ficant significam Impact
US= galea Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation
ltrcotpomttd
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-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-Tenn Impacts
San Luis Obispo County is a non-attainment area for the State ozone and PM,, (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 PM,o. 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.
3-122
Issues and Supporting Informat._.. Sources soarees Potctt Potemially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact'.
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation mitigation .
Incorporated
6. TRANSPORTATIONMIRCULATION. 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. compatibilitN x
with San Luis Obispo Co.
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 upo
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 energ
conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code which establishes energ
conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Buildings proposed as part of thi
project must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals throug
architectural review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passiv,
means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying o
mechanical systems to maintain comfort.
12 340
Issues and Supporting Informatt . Sources Sources potend potentially LcssThan No
Significant Signifi mt Significant Impact
Issues
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation unite Impact
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 conservin
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 3-124
Issues and Supporting Informa'L. . Sources sow Will O
Significant significant significant Impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation tswes mnn�on Impact
lncoryorated
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
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. Comment
from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements and dedications wil
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 1, 17 1 x
Comments from various City Departments (attached) indicate what fees, infrastructure, easements an
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 Sunaly
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 p
person or 0.162 acre-feet per person per year, which is somewhat higher than actual consumption durite
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 prese
demand is 773 acre-feet per year, which is available to serve new development. Half this amount (386 acr
feet) is available for development in annexation areas.
14 3-125
Issues and Supporting Informat. . Sources son= potent Potentially
Significant Signi&ant Significant Impact
issues nless
ER 206-99 FarmSupply Annexation mwg on Impact
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 1
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 3-126
Issues and Supporting Informa-L .'Sources Sowces Potent Potattialty lsssTltan No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
impact
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annexation tam m��n
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?
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," describe
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 Supervisois, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
16
3-127
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annex in
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 Whelen, 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
3-128
ER 206-99 Farm Supply Annex ,n
19. MITIGATION MEASURESIMONITORING 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. 147-1)
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
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 3-129
' � -.-_ 1 ) ori•. �� - � ..I
� ; I
W _
JCI,
F+
d
I
Tr_ T
Cb
IJ 5 I
01
I
--
il
VI%Anity 1
N 204 TANK FAR: _
I .A : 0 3W 600 900 Fed ANW 206-99
3-130
` MI
E y
SOCIAL SECURITY o y V U ~ :
P� OFFICE ■ V San glas
( c
ado =01 �.a La P�
Roan, (Pvt.i
L p�`yQ po Prado dad
urs ti
B Q ...
Bonetti
BORDER o
o illIe CO F
Par. ca Grana a rwe cn
m..
Meissner ,> 'a e- Coo.. k.
Hind Ln. Pam ess
Farm. .
c°j ----Supply.
Site
r N� Maw • t Tank Farnn Road
s
.
S
Or �'Z Nhort St. ;
Praderas w, .. e j A&R Welding
huparrosa Dr' Dfr. OJ U CO Site
_Q Verldes y Sub rban Road
ei0� Los ,�m o PacBell
so
alley vi//a�+t f N
ro
LDItENS�SCHODL
m eta a)• Not to Scab
S
Existing San Luis Obispo City Limits Proposed Annexation of:
� a � � a � � , — � m � A&R Welding, Farm Supply,
Concurrently-Proposed Annexation Areas and PacBell
���t.ueeeeeoesueueeeeeee soeeeseu ee■ecce eee■■
To:City of San Luis Obispo
MCONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED Site Locations
ASSOCIATES ANNEXATION AREAS
3-131
Aim
MARGARITAAREA
7: -_ - -�
..-COMMERCE -
- - P -_ ■
• =--- -` =ate---. _ \��_"--__-.-.--
__=_ ._-- -__=_:=-tee=__ \� ;•.. • \\ ,\\\ \ \ .
\ \.
IN
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE:
A large area for the development of aLand 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 fight manufacturing.
(Note:see policies for airport area)'
RECREATION: BUSINESS PARK
Publicly or privately owned recreation An area to be kept in low intensity uses
facGties,either outdoors or buildings.in until developed as a campus-like setting
a park setting. under a master plan.
CONCURRENTLY-PROPOSED Cityof San Luis oblspo
MASSOC IATES ANNEXATION AREAS General Plan
3-132
�1r��11111111111111��
1 �
� • - ��i� �� ,1■fie ' -
IBM
Nor
mills
all
City Limit Line .
_ _ r
� � 1111 / ■
■
■
Urban Heserve Line
9 r_ 1 • • • • . 1 1 �
4 Y
J �rOc
C t)
x—
�1 11 F
C3 O
❑.0
I N
� O
?-C c a p c sr
y N
`v�` x' 4 xJ 7'= ;
-� a
09 c on
�g 6
rr
a� _ 0 z ]� I x x x x ��
c L
m K x �'
r —J �S 6 :• ,
--0:—r X x— I ..
'0 x
R e
LJ O"
9 w
Cv
G x zoo g
o
VTC moi'+ X X
x —L x x
e�7 I
GS C
Z
9 Z Z D H o ID
C r 1 X-
rZ r 000 "
g Co CD CEJ O
Z
® � 0 C $ _x ��x r C� I x aX x x x
2 IMU�
CZ n
v
pCJ,nO x
- CD
A0
0 -0
z x
' I V
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND INFORMATION
Farm Supply Company-Proposed Annexation
Application For Annexation, including Prezoning and Environmental Impact
Determination for Fane 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 Fane Supply Company will be to provide it access to city services,
including water and sewer. This annexation proposal includes prezonmg 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
3-135
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.
"I I3IAma hqm Dmiomdrc
3-136
4Y71'+ARd17 'y(`!!! pQ
a Ps
V
� I
I
I
I
� I
I
I
� I
I
I
I
I
• m m m � I
I
I I I ill
O ---- —
I
' I
I � I
1
I
F
3A YH
I
I
1 I
I1 gg I
I
t
1
I
I
I
I I
o I I
I
g I I
I
I �
1 s
1 I
t I I
-137
I
I
I
o _
i - I
I = I
I I
aas
Esc ;
yr._3 •. tt !
I �Ff_h"� . 3f■ ,
I F11
r
c
- -ms
44
— I
i_r I
l I
_ I
c 3 I
I � �
C I
a
L I
i
3438
f
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 Staff's 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
Fane 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 Streedhighway
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.
3-139
t
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 industrial/service 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
uponthe 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.
3-140
f
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
Creekside/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 barns for hay are exempt from
transportation impact fees.
3-141
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 )~arm road, and
similar infrastructure improvements:
Improvement Plan Check: S294 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
3-142
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,
3-143
F
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 Farm 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
3-144
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 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.
3-145
FlyFire PreventionBureau
Memorandum
To: Whitney Mcrprain
From: Darren Drake, Fire Marshal
Date: December 2, 1999
Re: 204 Tank Fane Rd.—Farm Supply
Fire Department Access:
Access shall be in accordance with Article 9 of the Cardbmia Fre 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 Suriolies:
Water supplies shall be in accordance with Sections 901 and 903 of the California Fre 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 111-A of the
Califomia Fine Code.
Fire Hydrants:
Fire hydrants shall be installed in accordance with Section 903A 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 Catifomia Fire Code and the approved City Engineering Standards.
Fire Protection Systems and Eauipment
Fire protection systems shall be in accordance with the California Fre Code and California Building
Code as amended by the City.
Fie Safety During Construction:
Buildings undergoing construction, alteration or demolition shall be in accordance with Article 87 of the
California Fire Code.
Environmental Assessment
Agricultural areas (such as barns, storage, repair, parking and fueling areas or faafrties)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 dose proximity to underground oil pipelines and areas
that have had a history of contamiretion. R is recommended that all development within UnaxPs Tank
Farm Pipelme comply with the following;
3-146
1. Require a deed notification with reference to the potential or actual area contamination.
2. Require owners,developers,and contractors wdhin the area to obtain a copy of a basic notification
document prepared by England i£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.
•fte 2
3-147
PJ
city of san Luis osispo
utilities conseuvation office
Memorandum
January 18, 2000
To: Whitney McIlvaine, As late Planner
From: Tim A. Gwvin, 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.
3-148
1011 MEMORANDUM
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERS
Date: January 14,2000 From: Desiree Douglass,
Environmental Specialist
PLANNERS
To: Patti Whelen Phone: (805) 8784829
SURVEYORS
Company: Cannon Associates
364 Pacific Street
Address: San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 Job No: 98-0115 RECD
Project: Farm Supply Annexation of Tank Farm Road Parcel JAN 19 2000
Subject: Biological Survey CI1Y OF SAN LUIS OSISPO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CIVIL ENGWEERING
Grading and Drainage Dear Patti:
Water,Sewer,Storrs
Drain Systems
Rood/Erosion contra As requested,I conducted a site reconnaissance on December 6, 1999,of the
proposed Farm Supply site(currently under ownership of Unocal). This parcel is
"ECHAZWAL edit �n 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
Anpment Reliability
Program Development resources exist on the subject property.
PLANNWG
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
Pern' and ncy
Approvals last two months. Weedy vegetation was emerging over the field and,at that time,
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 CosPrn.".ocessing than the business park property. There are no ditches or culverts draining stormwater
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
FMMCIAL ANALYSIS During the site investigation two soil pits were dug to check for hydric soil indicators
Financial Plays 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
Spacial District of seasonal ponding of water to be considered in conjunction with hydric soils and
Managementhydrophytic vegetation as evidence of a jurisdictional wetland hydrologic regime.
Water Management Potential habitat for wildlife species was noted as absent
364 PACWc STREET SAN LUIS 086PO,CA 93401 3-149 'AGE t of 3
Marmon MEMORANDUM
SSOCIATES
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(lOYR 3/2) and very dark brown(10YR 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 glomerate)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'/2 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 Wes OwsPO. CA 93401 3-150 :E 2 OF 3
C ® �
{ J
"U
f. ' 1 �� r 1 •- { r � c it � �
uT 5 -�. ♦ r 1 i t � � ,� r -• T F a �r f.
f. 'r - t� + - , 1 t`�y �-.-1'77!7 , a � 'v •� .r-. -
♦ i
a
Ir
� 'r� •1 ,j. �1-;.-fir i e 4� .��}. f i+ ':4 '1 •� ..
ir
- '' Ir 1 !'. . 1117 .t ''SJ li '.t � � -° r •f V
t• 1. ^ r r J 4 t' I�. sf ei � R .-"• r ;' y lr •� �
- .r r' r ♦- '� t it rl _r..a_ J •� , ' �- w :
L. .. I : \ )It � r - f +`- r. j •-4 rR r �t` . r r r.n
' II
-.:^tel �'�-�•- � "t�o-{� r,;i�''n - "
r
�� . A .�- � lir�A r. J •. r _ _ I ,r X14 .�. \ \r� �.:
,.- ��!l ♦ r'�f)•q .'1 t :. ti ' rw t^.lfl �� t '�., yµ1f '• P) :� Tl �'-,.'' ` F "
j S �� '♦ 4 :.\. r - �R �`r �' )i71J1lL �.LI�frCy i �F1�,r � y:�., ~ i
y, ♦� J , f 1 t.. �1 '� � T�'r 4 ,
S_; N__LU_IS OBISPO COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING . AND BUILDINL
VIGOR HOLANDA, AICP
DIRECTOR
BRYCE TINGLE,AICP
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
ELLENCARROLL
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR
BARNEY MCCAY
January 25, 2000 CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL
RUN
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICI OFF
SERVICE PATRICK
ER
Community Development Dept./Whitney Mcllv. -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- 300-834-4636
EMAIL: ipcoping®slonet.org • FAX: (805)781-1242 - WEBSITE: http://vwvw�L% ipcopIng
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
1126/00
3-153
Draft Planning Commission f tes
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-commi n communication should be established.
Commissioner Loh requ d the minutes reflect specifically why a commissioner has
refrained from participation in articular item.
Chairman Ready could not recolle 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 ' s charge.
Items 4, 5, and 6 were considered as one hearing item.
4. 196 Suburban Road. ANNXIR 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 Faun Road. ANNXIR 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. ANNXIR 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 Mclvaine 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.
3-154
Draft Planning Commission I. .,es
January 26, 2000
Page 10
Associate Planner Mclivaine 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 Ws 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:
rim Hatch, Pults and Associates, representing the A & R Welding, urged approval of
the annexations as presented, and complimented staff on their hard work.
3-155
Draft Planning Commission A as
January 26,2000
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 Farris Supply and Pacific. 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
(CS) and Manufacturing (M) and (2) adopt a resolution recommendinq 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-specfic 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
3-156
Draft Planning Commission A .,ds
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
3-157
PACIFIC BELL
PRE-.ANNEXATION
AGREEMENT
r
3=.158
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
This annexation agreement is made and entered into this 21
157day of9L&—W--Y,
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 t
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
WHEREAS, Paeifie Telephe-Re • T i r
� t he owner 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:
LO Pacific Bell Telephone Company, a California corporation
3-159
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
3-160
Pacific Bell Pre-annexation Agreement
ANNX/R1ER 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 tothe 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 (Califomia 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.
3-161
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
OWNE :
BY:
Director, Corporate a)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
3-162
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. 1183467
NOTARY PUBLIC-CAUfOf1NIA
Centra Costa Courcy
Yy Cama Expires May t1,2002 j
Title or Type of Document: PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
For City of San Luis Obispo
3-163
Legal Description of property at 196 Suburban Road:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 6 OF THE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 24, 26, 31 THE
NORTH HALF OF LOTS 18, 230 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 THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY IN BOOK
OF RECORD OF SURVEYS BOOK 1, PAGE 4 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN14ING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SUBURBAN ROAD (50; WIDE)
AT ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6;
THENCE NORTH 00 19. 10" WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 6 967.36
FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM ROAD (40' WIDE);
THENCE NORTH 890 591 51" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM
ROAD 30.00 FEETS
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE OF TANK FARM ROAD SOUTH 00 19' 3orr
EAST PARALLEL TO SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 6, 430.06 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 890 51' 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 0. 14' 12" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF LOT 6, 537.23
FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SUBURBAN ROADS
THENCE SOUTH 890 .51' 21" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF SUBURBAN ROAD,
323.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EIIMTT A pg 1 of 2
3-164
to
a
ao
I CL
mo
w_sr a..eN /I M_IS.se.eN 3
i1'IJt/ m !I'II{ r{xosr P GJ
L • O O � 0 O - �
11 A � w f1 L
Y ti
O m ----------
------------
-------------
A 0
N _______
m m •rsaa
i
J Q • \ Qty
Gib . • t N C
• • r
O 1 �
• 1 m
O = h of n }
1, 1
� R V . a
Q ` n
If's OL 1 • I'2
KE)• 1 1
�{r • , O
W
,
Q • � 1 7
1 ♦ 1 IA -/•r 1 i /
Cd f� __
< N •., sr N
arras
{ • i V Y 0 o 1h
Ii
�r�• 1 _ / as �m 4 � �V
`•J Af TII 17
10 1t ° ^
O �
i N. m N • rC<!9 .
•Q MI 4 • a_ �� A f m wf A m m '
V0,4 I's
Ain �-� wsfs M.IlA uo+. • � Iero[s :a � a
rlir (17 < W 1 C
O' •---i f. d CI
Q.
O N Y N
IP fe'rI j co W
del m a N _ J
a N
° v S bA
a
it d 3 Qr
N
y C!
ti wm 4
' Z8.6!\I N CL
m 0<� ►`1
frfr/ ...n a
t��N�r mO O a �� W
M •-� y P
w a 3 Ql k
t`� \ � , <S ..ter• � <e � Y c u Q
R �,y P -- .aa• w
3-165
A&R WELDING
PRE-ANNEXATION
AGRE-MENT
3466
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND X : . l
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: �/
City of San Luis Obispo /
1 1 ; Caummity 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 15 day of Leh . 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 Fawn Rd(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, A & R Welding are the owners in fee of certain real property in the County of
San Luis Obispo, commonly known asAPN # 076-352-032 further
,ank En
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. _ ); and
I 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 govemment 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
3-167
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 Road
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 Binding 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 felly satisfied by
payment in RM ofthis Interim Fee amount
If the OWNERS choose not to.pay the Interim Fee prior to the adoption of a Finalized Fee,
payment in fiill 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
3-168
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,TUAE 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.
3-169
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is executed on the date above stated at San Luis'
Obispo,California
ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED
OWNERS
BY: 11
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
3-170
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. OFGnLSE&
DIANE FL STUART WrARY W
COMMISSION 11142M C
i (p $MLWSOMSPOOMAN
MrOlonEaJura 20.Zoos
Notary Public
Pre-annexation Agreement for 205 Tank Farm Road
3-171
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
EXMBrr A pg 1 of 2
3-1'72
O
• 40
mo
rYft e N rf YIf f•Yos/ f a 7
O
� O A i N O
T sisa6 I N
---------- -- ------------ -------------
Sriti
Lo
zamap = m
Ti 1 J
• p ¢2
V 4 a FVVers
t /� .•1 ti I • OW
o � t 1 • 4 ¢'^
. C a ^ m w i m •:� yn
ti
� fpi 9 A ; •1 V W¢
n
.L.__.___---_--.__-_____... f
/f•L DL
� j m � I O • 2y
1 i 00 _• -- Y--------------------------
el WAS
_•_______________________OYfN,fD•oN 1
C �' ' ` 7 A m ' � j N 1•
. 01
14
_ 1 ���A �m 4 Oa � w •
«�ror n
�.
V w + v
M A J Y N n A w w N V
L ti a
I'•1
CL
E �Q = A•„ ar«s
1 wsfi M,f<.o .fw• � �o•oLs
,; A• r�1 Q
_ 6 •' 01
1 LO'/LL •1 1\ f � a
g vi ve V6
� aq - •
1 O r `• q p m o .r Cu
cd st
�tq � n w • � m x
rT—
fo•r< ..A com:M N
T.. 4r
�w A O O N V Mn• O
d
Np w �.�0.•v
LIcd
�0
y FMM/V
CL b-4
IL
tf vwv wvr -0 O 1`r �Wy
�• O O
3-173
. �J
FARM SUPPLY
PRE p RATION
AGREEMENT
3-174.
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 corporator,
(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:
3-175
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.
3-176
Farm Supply Pre-annexation Agreement
ANNX/R/ER 20Fr99
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. Time 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.
3-177
Farm Supply Pre-annexation Agreement
ANNXIR/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, Califomia.
ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED
O ERS:
BY:
Ji rabec , General Manager for Fa rm �;upply 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
3-178
MID-STATE BANK
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of .
.tty of
On before me, �� `6Y—,personally appeared
Date Name, Title of Officer(e gr,Jwm-Bve, Notary Public)
,[ personally known to me - OR - [ ] proved to me on the
ame(s)ofsigner(s) basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personfsf whose
name(' islare subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/sheAhey executed the same in
his/kerfth& authorized capacity(ieS), and that by
his/.heFkimir signature(4) on the instrument the person(g),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(g) acted,
PATRICIA K MMES executed the instument.
~ COMM. #1155733
low NoL UBUC—C WESITNS my hand and official seal.
SAN OBWO COUNTY
y Comm.Expires Sept.18,2001
Signature of Notary
.. n..... .... ....a,::,v.............n,....v.. ...... .....n.n.... : .. v..... ....:::...............i:::: .....'vii. ....'isi<?S:i;.ri::::v.•ypi,:i:.';!}:i:i::.::e:::'�:
�... .. .. ..:nn.::::1:...:n.:.W.:,,.:..x: ....,.....n.k{.v..:w...:.nr..... .... .:T... ..... ;::::....... �$.:.: ..GY>'.
..y.+� nxv:v.nV v.. .. ...:rv:\n:..........n......... ...n...:::. .::r.. +r:.:.......... ............
..vpp�� .... +�<}. .nn...n..$.:.v.:n....::.:..:...............n...........:.........i......n.....:... .. ...:. i. A:in:ri:i:Fiawi:yj•:....nn pvn4:::ry:n
.. ... ...n,..... ... .. ...n.:.:nn..., .....n.....:......n.:..ni.........,:n.i.v......:::�!:r::vv.r::::...........n..r.....:....n........:.......:.:::::::::ii"fiii:OR.'.:::!:.Si2}:.iiiii:.::........:
:n�.:.:x.n ....�...<:.J.Sa(.......:.......v.l.........1...................,...... ..:.�.:..,..::..........n............................. ... ..... .......a. .i;Jii�i'if..Y:::.:i:v:..
„1„. ..aa<..i x::n.nwm:vVi G. C4,.:........... .........n.................v........ ... .........::::.. ..:......n...a.::::::::::::::...........
P9:3}:v'.:P n<.ham«..:v.v..}.v.:..... n ..,....4i'.l.J::..:..v...:.....:. : .i......................:.................:..::.:.......n...:::.......
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent
fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER(PRINCIPAL) DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
[ ] Individual
[ ] Corporate Officer
TYtle(s) Title or Type of Document
[ ] Partner(s) [ ] Limited
[ ] General
Number of Pages
[ ] Attorney-in-Fact /����
[ ]Trustee(s) 26
[ ] Guardian/Conservator Date ofDocument
[ ] Other:.
Signers)Other Than Names Above
Absent Signer (Principal) is Representing:
Name of PersonW or Fntity(s)
ADM-M (os/a) 3-179
Legal Description of property at 204.Tank Farm.Road:
PARCEL Z OF PARCEL MAP CO 84-054; IN .THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, .ACCORDING TO MAP RECORDED
OCTOBER 29, 1-985 IN BOOK 3$; PAGE 32 OF PARCEL- MAPS;
EIMIT A pg 1 of 2
3*480
� � � •= F O O �` w � /pip
4!y � T 1 wr nvJ• /p/�
1�.�r•lI CPQ � ` �gftl•62
W ♦ N to
ysSmG i mma R �- � 1
cm
`�
\` 1 V
O $:N ro
°�
N .•.� _� a " g a ,¢
co
CO
N vim�A r m ` sa.o• �
w �JN m m ro e a pa UI
_ N `
� s i
b \
� N i ro a a a asye ...- � fasa � • N
V (a', •� 770.0• .vvw I•/I'W irte. �• I UI
em I N�
947.00 Ir0.0•
•
m ro,•a' fM m N E ��� 9 • T
' s fA uo.ss c a aJ
� 61711 � V Z a `p ro • S
n m Obi k-, C �lA
CA 101.•v • (n
gp _d•,..,v r.a.vv •a.a a mowerIt
�r srsf a i
dw
o w
3 I •M N A '• NO•o7•w i 'LIeJ] 0
WW1 --------------------- -.---- •
I e w � � •
• R I ms overs. ;P V �o W • i
-----------------------_--i- .. •' it • ro I
mo `• I p • t
1
_______________________
GGNn 1. I D w ,• � r
NO i• _______ 4_ Y• O y
is ` I u � ♦ Y
m I a �luJ w -
• I �a•� J
m n r
N
00 r
1ec-S!----------
10 m N O
N V
l b
ym m p a L V
V 0 o
n •+ R /1►+.Ls
cO /vex N i fal.fJ
�� NO•ve'rI_W M � O•ro••r-w
N Q�
O
o �
Cl
x_181 .
s - cn