HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/26/2001, AGENDA council agcnaa
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CITY HALL, 990 PAL M S T R E E T
Monday, February 26, 2001
Action Update
7:00 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Council Members Jan Howell Marx, Christine Mulholland,
Ken Schwartz, Vice Mayor Ewan, Mayor Allen K. Settle
All Council Members were present
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA(not to exceed 15 minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time,you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda or items on the
Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not
on the agenda,except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by
persons exercising their public testimony rights(Gov.Code Sec.54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.
Staff reports and other written documentation relating to each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's
Office in Room 1 of City Hall.
None.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. DRAFT MID-HIGUERA STREET ENHANCEMENT PLAN (ER AND GPI 39-98)
(J.MANDEVILLE/HOOK—2.5 HOURS)
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Consider the mitigated negative declaration of environmental
impact. 2) Conceptually approve the Council Hearing Draft Mid-Higuera Street
Enhancement Plan, with or without changes. 3) Direct staff to place a draft resolution
on the March 20th Council meeting agenda to approve the mitigated negative
IF
Council Agenda Actiort-�pdate Monday,-I=ebruary 26, 2001
declaration, approve the Enhancement Plan, amend the General Plan Land Use
Element, and initiate rezoning as shown in the Plan.
ACTIONS:
1) Conceptually approved the Council Hearing Draft Mid-Higuera Street
Enhancement Plan, with the following changes: a) modify crosswalks to ensure
accessibility, b) minimize the amount of bike path in creek set-back area, and c)
minimize the size of the bridges (4:1, Settle).
2) Staff directed to place a draft resolution on the March 20, 2001 Council meeting
agenda to approve the mitigated negative declaration, approve the Enhancement
Plan, amend the General Plan Land Use Element, and initiate rezoning as shown
in the Plan, with the exception of the proposed Tourist Commercial(CT) Zone for
the Ca/Trans property, for which staff was directed to bring back for Council
consideration other alternatives (3:2, Settle, Schwartz).
A. ADJOURNED.
2
council agcnaa
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Monday, February 26, 2001
7:00 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Council Members Jan Howell Marx, Christine Mulholland,
Ken Schwartz, Vice Mayor Ewan, Mayor Allen K. Settle
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA(not to exceed 15 minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda or items on the
Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not
on the agenda,except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by
persons exercising their public testimony rights(Gov.Code Sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.
Staff reports and other written documentation relating to each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's
Office in Room 1 of City Hall.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. DRAFT MID-HIGUERA STREET ENHANCEMENT PLAN (ER AND GPI 39-98)
(J.MAN DEVI LLE/HOOK—2.5 HOURS)
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Consider the mitigated negative declaration of environmental
impact. 2) Conceptually approve the Council Hearing Draft Mid-Higuera Street
Enhancement Plan, with or without changes. 3) Direct staff to place a draft resolution
on the March 20th Council meeting agenda to approve the mitigated negative
declaration, approve the Enhancement Plan, amend the General Plan Land Use
Element, and initiate rezoning as shown in the Plan.
A. ADJOURN.
Council Agenda Mono,, February 26, 2001
CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS: The Mayor will announce each item and thereafter, the
hearing will be conducted as follows:
1. City staff will present the staff report and recommendation on the proposal being heard and respond to questions
from Council.
2. The Mayor will open the public hearing by first asking the project applicantlappellant(or his/her representative)to
present any points necessary for the Council,as well as the public,to fully understand the proposal.
3. The Mayor will then ask other interested persons to come to the podium to present testimony either in support of
or in opposition to the proposal.
4. Finally, the Mayor will invite the applicantlappellant(or histher representative) back to the podium to respond to
the public testimony, if appropriate. The Mayor will then close the public hearing and limit further discussion to
the Council and staff prior to the Council taking a vote.
RULES FOR PRESENTING TESTIMONY AT A PUBLIC HEARING: City Council meetings often involve highly emotional
issues. It is important that all participants conduct themselves with courtesy,dignity and respect. All persons who wish to
present testimony are asked to observe the following rules:
1. Speakers are asked to submit speaker slips to the City Clerk.
2. If you have filled out a Speaker Slip,the Mayor will call you to the podium.
3. Speakers shall address the Council from the podium after giving his/her name and city of residence. Speakers
shall direct their comments to the Council,not the audience.
4. Speakers shall limit comments to three minutes. The Mayor, after all others have spoken, may allow additional
brief comments from speakers who have already commented on the same agenda item.
5. If testifying as paid representatives, as defined in the Municipal Code speakers shall register as a Municipal
Advocate and shall preface their comments by identifying themselves as Municipal Advocates (§2.64.020 &
§2.64.050&§2.64.070).
6. Applicants,appellants or applicant representatives desiring to speak shall:
a. Submit speaker slips to the City Clerk (available on a plastic rack at the entrance to the Council
Chamber).
b. Shall be permitted to speak first during the public comment portion of the public hearing for not more
than ten minutes.
c. Address the Council from the podium after giving their name and address, and/or the name and
address of the applicant/appellant they are representing. If the applicant/appellant's representative is a
paid Municipal Advocate,they shall comply with Number 5 above.
7. If you challenge an issue in court, you may be limited to raising only those issue you or someone else raised at
this public hearing as described above, or in written correspondence delivered to the City before or during the
public hearing.
COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE: Written comments on agenda items are encouraged and are most effective if presented
at least five days prior to the meeting. Council Correspondence regarding agenda items received after 5:00 p.m. on the
day of the Council meeting will be distributed the following day.
goRegular City Council meetings are broadcast on KCPR, 91.3 FM. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include
the disabled in all of its services,programs,and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Please speak
to the City Clerk prior to the meeting if you require a hearing amplification device. For more agenda information,call 781-7103.
2
Recehoed:02.Feb.01 01:51 PM From:688453- (o:4135028580 ]owered byAFax.com Page: 1 of 1
LM RWM BANK � "
February 2, 0' Co'�`
Facs1mik(413-502-8580
Michael Robert Spangler
664 Marsh Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Loan No.: 025102783-6
Property: 11 1Tiguera Sr., 15 Higuera St.,31 Hignera St,
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Dear Mr.Spangler,
As we notified you on January 26,2001 and again January 30,2001 you are required to provide Los Padres Bank
with a paid flood inmirance policy that adequately insures your properties in accordance with FEMA and the
National Flood Insurance Program.
At this time we have not received evidence of such a paid pre,.:,,.,; Accept this as notice should you fail to provide
evidence of a paid premium with adequate coverage by Spm today,Los Padres Bank will force order this coverage
on your behalf. The yearly rate is$14,540,00,whicb is based on a$1.00 rate for every$100.00 of required
coverage.
Please do ret hesitate to contact us should you have any questions.
Sincere�ly. _
Robin
Loan Service Depama=nt
Cc: Susan Weber,Los Padres Bank-
Sue
ankSue Holland,Los Padres Bank
610 Alamo Pintado Road
at Highway 246
Solvang, California 93463
(805) 6886644
FAX (805) 688-4959 '
February 26,2001
Dear Council, FED 2 Z 2001
I have attended seven or so meetings on the Mid-Higuera Enhancement Project. I spoke strongly atTri ained in
this brief recap.
Overall,most if not all of my and my neighbors'concerns are not to be found in the staff report. We have been totally ignored and our needs
dismissed as not important. The Mid-Higuera Street district is extremely important to us who have our lives invested here.
To go through all this public input and have so many important and relevant concerns either ignored or ridiculed should not be the job of
staff,yet it is the job staff has chosen.to do on Mid-Higuera.
MEDIAN
The center turn lane is essential to the functioning of our area for at least the following reasons. The proposed median interferes with all of
the below.
1.Customers'cars access from SLO to business on east side of Higuera. Must have center lane to tum left.
2.Customers'cars entering from opposite side stage and adjust to traffic before crossing traffic to enter business.
3.Trucks stage in early morning to enter"business."(Where will they stage with medians?)
4.Large trucks use to tum into businesses.
5.By destroying customer access from SLO proper-businesses and properties on the east side of Higuera are seriously and
permanently damaged. Two-thirds of business is from SLO and removing such important access is congruent to moving these
properties to a back street. A drop of 25%to 33%can be expected for many firms on the east side of Higuera!
6.A safety lane for sudden stops due to local business traffic is eliminated,resulting in more injuries and accidents with a median.
7.Going to all the trouble and expense of widening Higuera.and mainly getting trees down the middle is a poor use of public
money.
8.Staging for left turns onto Walker or Pacific
9.Interferes with water being able to rerun to the creek through the"park"by the Marsh Street bridge. A 6"median plus an 8"road
crown=a 14"wall which would prevent up to one-third of the water from-being able to ever try to rerun to the creek through the
'park."
The median is vigorously opposed by virtually 100%of the local business and property owners in the Mid-Higuera district. Where are the
traffic studies to show how customers can get to the businesses on the east side of Higuera? How much extra traffic will be generated and
how much harm to the businesses? (no concern to our planners)
SPEED VS.NEIGHBORHOODS
The planners are recommending a median to help streamline the traffic flow. By streamlining,they mean speed.up!.
All public input they have received concerning Mid-Higuera has requested that the speed be.slowed down to better accommodate the needs of
customers entering and leaving the businesses safely. To exit the road and enter Higuera safely it is best if traffic flow is not streamlined,but
slightly slowed and certainly cautioned!
Why is the actual physical safety of our neighborhood not a concern to the planners? They have left out all discussions of the challenges to
the basic premises of their actions..
The center lane again acts as a safety lane for when the flow gets"too streamlined"and people need emergency space to maneuver because
of sudden stops to exit.or allow the business traffic entering the flow. Where is the discussion of the loss of this safety lane?
A majority of the accidents(last two year"nformation from SLO traffic department)involve too much speeding on Higuera and not the
irregular meetings of Walker and Pismo.
WALKER STREET
Walker Street is given short shrift. Points and facts the planners have consistently ignored:
1.Walker is essential to the commercial businesses in the area—ice plant,SDRS,carpet and upholstery businesses all depend daily
on Walker. The large trucks used would be forced into the neighborhood and many of those streets do not accommodate large
trucks. (Because Pismo is a one-way street with only its last block and a half as commercial,it is necessary to keep Walker open for
commercial access.)
2.Branch,High and Sandercock neighborhoods use Walker extensively as the preferred means of access to the neighborhoods.
-Walker left is much better than High Street left to enter neighborhoods when exiting freeway at Marsh.
-High Street left tum volume will double or triple if Walker is closed.
-No traffic studies have been done on Walker Street flow from Higuera or the left tum volume from Higuera to High to
evaluate what actually needs doing.
3.No affected residents from fhuse neighborhoods have been"noticed"by the city r,r-these hearings—they are affected but not
informed as per requirements.
TRAFFIC PROBLEMS
Planners'expertise in our neighborhood has already been proven to be inadequate. Ignoring recommendations of locals regarding the impact
on traffic and parking,planners went ahead and created the single worst traffic problem in the Mid-Higuera area by allowing Trader Joe's to
locate here.
Arrogantly refusing to even acknowledge their previous blunder,they are advocating a median to eliminate the middle turn lane that has been
serving as a safety valve for the Trader Joe's traffic problem. In the last two years,four out of five accidents on Higuera between High and
South involve Trader Joe's. Without the center safety lane,these accidents could have been much more serious.
When the center lane is gone,accidents and injuries will go up. Why won't the planners even acknowledge this?
The traffic danger created by Trader Joe's is created not by the left turn volume across traffic that the planners wish to eliminate but by the
right tum volume they wish to encourage. It is further exacerbated by the speed on Higuera,which planners wish to increase and the
neighborhood needs to restrain. Since 1/17/91,9 accidents have occurred near Trader Joe's. Only one involves taming across northbound
traffic. The majority were rear end collisions caused by people travelling too fast to stop for a car turning right,directly into Trader Joe's lot.
Further,a look at High Street intersection for the last two years shows the biggest accident problem is excessive speed on Higuera.
Their"field of dreams"theory—a rear access road that.magically provides access—is present at Trader Joe's and yet does little or nothing to
address the entry traffic problem created by Trader Joe's. The planners again ignore the reality of the actual situation and choose to believe
that the theoretical opposite will happen. Ignoring the real and only presenting how you wish it would be is not sound planning. The crucial
back road they wish to put through the middle of Hayward Lumber is supposed to solve the kind of problem Trader Joe's created. Yet Trader
Joe's has this road and it has not solved the problem.
EIR REPORT
The EIR report to go with the Mid-Higuera Street Enhancement Plan has some amazingly major flaws that should be addressed.
Under traffic and ttansportation,,the environmental impact report seems to have fallen apart or perhaps a different environmental
impact report was used,not the one that would go with this project.
15A states that there would be no impact on the existing street loads. This is so utterly not true as to be amazing. By closing Walker
Street,traffic that normally would go through Walker is shifted to High Street or shifted into the neighborhoods. There have been no
studies by staff to see the impact of closing Walker if staff is unaware of the actual use of Walker Street in the community and has no
concept of the role Walker plays. By closing Walker Street,truck traffic that currently uses it on an extremely regular basis is shunted
into neighborhoods whose streets are not wide enough and whose turns are not large enough to accommodate that traffic.
Neighborhood traffic into the Branch/Sandercock neighborhoods are forced into the left tum on High Street,which is the most unsafe
left tum on all of Higuera Street. Even if the Mid-Higuera widening happens and approves this intersection,the current turn pocket
being anticipated by planners is woefully insufficient to handle the volume that closing Walker Street will increase.
15C says that there is no impact in changing traffic patterns as a result changing safety risks. This is entirely not true. Again,staff has
done no studies relevant to the Walker Street closure that would address this issue. Anyone familiar with our neighborhood and the
traffic patterns therein knows that the closing of Walker Street will result in much increased traffic. Merely to get to our business,
instead of going one block we now have to go four blocks. This is true of other businesses in the area,and does not take into account
the extra time sitting at the High Street light and the extra dangerous High Street left turns that will result in closing Walker.
Section D of the traffic report says that there will be no impact due to sharp curves or dangerous intersections. Again this is not true.
By closing Walker Street and forcing the traffic into the neighborhoods,there are sharp turns that trucks that use Walker Street will be
unable to safely make that will be very incompatible.
Overall,the traffic section of the environmental impact report seems to be off the cuff by staff. As research I have done has made it
quite clear that staff has done no traffic counts on the volume of traffic on Walker Street coming off of Higuera going into our
neighborhoods.
Staff has done no surveys or traffic counts on the volume of commercial traffic that must use Walker Street in order to access Pismo.
Pismo is one way and therefore the ability to access it is limited. If you don't have access to the last block of Pismo Street through
Walker,you must get access through the neighborhoods. When leaving the Marsh Street freeway offramp,it will be accessed
frequently through the neighborhoods.
In doing an environmental impact report,in all fairness,staff should be required to do actual studies to be able to come up with facts
rather than making up data that suits their conclusions. The few studies done by staff in our area show that the traffic off High Street
disappears into the neighborhood fairly quickly. Staff studies only show the right turn volume onto High Street off of Higuera. This
volume is probably the least signif. -'statistic �
in either the High Street or the Walk_ ,treet intersections,and yet it seems to be the
only statistic staff has regarding volume.
Staff has done nothing to consider the actual length of turn lanes needed if the median is put in. By assuming that everything that staff
visualizes works and by assuming they work perfectly and then assuming there will be no impact,staff is able to give themselves a
clean bill of health.
For staff to do a competent job on the closure of Walker Street and the impact on our neighborhood,there needs to be studies done.
Studies on the traffic flow on Walker from Higuera Street into the neighborhoods,studies and surveys on the need of large truck
access on this street,and,lastly studies to show that if this street is closed how the turnvolume that it absorbs coming off Higuera
from the Marsh Street ramp,how this volume will be absorbed successfully by a left turn pocket onto High Street.
EIR reports are supposed to knowledgeable,informative and speak to the issue. This EIR report,when it comes to traffic,is merely
just a gloss-over and offers no substantial factual information to base any determinations on whatsoever. I,therefore,feel that this
EIR is not only flawed,it is basically a"hokum"EIR put together at least from the standpoint of traffic concerns strictly for the
purpose of supporting staff's presentation and positions on the Mid-Higuera district.
Item 3 in the EIR under Walker Street improvement says Walker Street will end in a cul-de-sac. It further says that closing Walker
and Pacific will provide safer traffic conditions and will not cause significant adverse effects to area street circulation,"according to
background studies done for the Mid-Higuera Street Enhancement Plan." In talking to city staff and traffic engineering,I could find
no background reports done specifically for the Mid-Higuera Plan. These reports must be secret reports,as the traffic departments had
no knowledge of them when I inquired. If there are no background reports done specifically for the Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan,
what reports are they basing their conclusions on? If the reports are not attached as part of the EIR,I'd suggest that either they don't
exist or they are being misused in order to try to have them say something that they are not saying.
In essence,item 3 on the EIR regarding Walker Street is essentially untrue. City traffic engineer reports for the last two full years of
accidents show that although there were five minor accidents at the intersection of Walker/Pacific/Higuera. None of these accidents
resulted in injury,they all happened during the daytime,and only one out of the five could be construed as having anything to do with
the unique nature of the intersection. Contrast this to the High/Pismo/Higuera intersection where there were seven accidents. Three of
these involved personal injury,three out of the seven happened at night and a majority were the fault of vehicles travelling at too high
a speed on Higuera Street,and again not a fault of the uniqueness of the intersection. Just up Higuera near Trader Joe's there have
been nine accidents,eight primarily caused by too high a speed on Higuera and one involving a left turn across traffic from the center
lane.
The center lane itself has been involved in ZERO accidents according to traffic record.
PLEASE DO NOT PUT THE MEDIAN IN!
PLEASE DO NOT CLOSE WALKER STREET!
*Items staff report addresse"ll other concerns have been brought up to staff in public testimony at least three times and been ignored by
staff.
Sincerely,
Richard W. Ferris,property and business owner
Mid-Higuera Enhancement District
Higuera & Walker
3 Accidents 01/01/99 - 02/09/01
n
3/19/9VA3/99 0 Nom tilstat
I
I
I
0
M
rn
LOLO
0
N
O
Within 75 of Intersection (0)accidents with insufficient data for display
0 Straight =!n Parked X Pedestrian Fixed objects:
11 Stopped <-v. Erratic X Bicycle o General a Pole
<— Unknown <--,r Out of control p Injury ® signal ® curb
< » Backing v,- Right turn @ Fatality ® Tree Animal
Overtaking y— Left turn =V Nighttime 3rd vehicle
q — Sideswipe F�:— U-turn DUI Extra data
Y
ir
z b 4aIlk
C b
a� 6' o
<7 c)
cl
a w,
arm
Lit •r " ^-m to
16
Higuera&Pacific
- 2 Accidents 01/01/99 -Z02/09/01
0
0
0
0
0
02/12/99 0
Wdhin 75'of Intersection (0)accidents with insufficient data for display
< Straight ===-i Parked X Pedestrian Fixed objects:
0 Stopped Erratic X Bicycle ❑ General a Pole
0 Unknown Out of control 0 Injury ® sisal a curb
-.. Backing Nt,_ Right turn 0 Fatality ® Tree K- Animal
Overtaking or-- Left turn ;7- Nighttime 4 3rd vehicle
qa Sideswipe F>7— U-turn i-4 DUI x. Extra data
Obispo.- Ciry of San Luis 02/2312001
�ilil 111 II 111111 IIS���;���l�llll�llllll 111 � III
I
Cl of sAn luis oBispo
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
February 16, 2001
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
MID-HIGUERA STREET ENHANCEMENT PLAN
You are being notified that the San Luis Obispo City Council will hold a public hearing to
consider the Mid-Higuera Street Enhancement Plan. The Public Hearing portion of the meeting
will be held on Monday,February 26,2001 beginning at 7:00 p.m.in the Council Chamber at
City Hall,990 Palm Street.
The Plan covers the Higuera Street corridor between Marsh St. and Madonna Road, and addresses
flood hazard reduction,Higuera Street widening and landscaped median,Walter Street mini-plaza,
realigning Bianchi Lane with High Street, a new creek bikeway along San Luis Obispo Creek,
Parker Street improvements,new land uses, like retail shops, offices and hotel and conference
center,two new public parks, and preserving open space and creek habitat. Planned changes are
intended to improve the area's appearance, economic vitality, safety and environmental quality.
The public is welcome to attend and comment. Written comments are encouraged. Other items
may be discussed before or after this item. Please know that if you challenge this action in court,
you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised during the public
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or
prior to,the public hearing.
The agenda report,including recommendation by staff, will be available for review in the
Office of the City Clerk(Room#1 of City Hall)the Wednesday before the meeting.
For more information,please contact.Jeff Hook of the Communit a lopment
Department at 781-7176 or email at jhook@slocity.org.
Lee Price,C.M.C.
City Clerk
/OI The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities.
V� Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805) 781-7410.
ee�
�a
a o
O o °
eiwcni
1 m
CO q ,
f
sem, a e
South Stree
1 a Qom
1 OB
1 OM
00000D
1 0 moa 8 �, e
a
1 2 ❑
I
or
a
1 1
I
Mid-Higuera Enhancement
Plan Area