Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/20/2001, PH 1 - AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING (C-S-S-H) council M.knDem j acEnaa Report I.. ".6� H C I T Y OF SAN LU I S O B I S P O FROM: John Mandeville, Community elopment Director Prepared By: Jeff Hook, Associate Plann SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND ZONING MAP FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING (C-S-S- H) TO PUBLIC (PF-H) FOR THE RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION CENTER AND SAN LUIS OBISPO RAILROAD MUSEUM. CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt a resolution and introduce an ordinance to print, changing the land use designation from Services and Manufacturing (C-S-S-H) to Public (PF-H) for the Railroad Transportation Center and San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum. DISCUSSION Background Last year the City Council approved plans.and specifications and a construction contract for the development of the new Railroad Transportation Center (RTC), a 121- space public parking lot in the Historic Railroad District. That facility is expected to be complete in Fall 2001 and will serve Amtrak passengers, nearby businesses, bicyclists, bus passengers, and visitors. As shown in the approved Railroad District Plan, the RTC will also include a Railroad Historic Museum to be developed in the former Southern Pacific Freight Warehouse. The RTC and the Railroad Museum were approved in concept by the City Council as part of the Railroad District Plan. The Council has allocated approximately $450,000 in state transportation funds for the historic warehouse's rehabilitation, and the City has entered into a contract with a local architectural firm to prepare plans and specifications for the project. The RTC and proposed museum are on City-owned land and will serve as public facilities. As such, staff believes the most appropriate General Plan land use designation and zoning designation is "Public", or PF. The site is currently designated "Services and Manufacturing" on the General Plan Land Use Map, and zoned C-S-S-H for Commercial Services, with Special Consideration and Historic overlay zones. The Special Consideration overlay requires approval of a conditional use permit before a new use can be established. The site is located within the Railroad Historic District, so provisions of the adopted Railroad District Plan apply to new development. A general plan amendment and rezoning is necessary to bring City land use and zoning designation in line with the property's anticipated land uses. Council Agenda Report—Railroad Transportation Center and Museum Page 2 Advisory Body Recommendation At its October 10`h meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended the City Council approve changes to the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map to accommodate the proposed Railroad Transportation Center and the San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum (Planning Commission resolution attached). The Commission's vote was 6-0 (Commr. Loh absent). There was no public comment on the item Data Summary Applicant and Property Owner: City of San Luis Obispo Zoning: C-S-S-H General Plan: Commercial - Service Environmental status: Negative Declaration Site Description: The site area is approximately 2 acres. It is a long and narrow parcel that slopes from the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way on the east towards Santa Barbara Street on the west. Existing slope banks along Santa Barbara Street are about 1.8 to 2 meters (5.9 to 6.56 feet) high adjacent to the Railroad Square building and diminish in height as you move southward. The historic Southern Pacific Freight Warehouse is located along the eastern boundary of the site. Evaluation Under the General Plan, the City plans for and designates appropriate locations for various types of public and cultural facilities, and these locations are designated "Public" on the Land Use Element Map and zoned PF on the Official Zoning Map. The PF zone is intended to provide for the wide range of public uses likely to be located on public property, such as government offices, public parking, social services, museums and other cultural facilities. Public uses are those conducted by governmental or nonprofit agencies. However this zone also allows complementary private and commercial uses that, within the overall guidance of the General Plan, provide a public benefit. The RTC will provide these facilities: 1. vehicle parking for existing and anticipated AMTRAK patrons. 2. new San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum within the former railroad warehouse. 3. vehicle parking for the uses to be housed within historic railroad warehouse. 4. bus parking for the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) as a "layover facility." 5. pedestrian and bicycle connections to and through the site. 6. opportunities for the display and movement of historic rail cars and equipment. The RTC's current Commercial-Service designation allows "parking as a principal use" but does not allow museums. Three zones allow museums: PF, C-C and C-R. Of these, staff believes PF 1-z Council Agenda Report—Railroad Transportation Center and Museum Page 3 is most appropriate for the RTC because it reflects the predominantly public-serving nature of the use and will be compatible with adjacent C-S uses. Museums are allowed in the PF zone, subject to approval of a Planning Commission use permit. Incidental uses related to the primary public uses, such as small food concessions, caretaker's quarters, public meeting rooms and exhibit, and other related,public-serving uses would also be possible with use permit approval. With the proposed change, many types of services and manufacturing currently allowed under C- S zoning, such as retail sales of cars, appliances and furniture, architectural and engineering offices, and manufacturing would no longer be allowed. These uses would continue to be allowed in other C-S zoned areas within the Railroad District, and in the South Higuera and Broad Street corridors. ALTERNATIVES 1. Retain the site's current land use designation and zoning and amend the Zoning Regulations to allow museums in the C-S zone. Under this approach, use permit approval would be required for any new use due to the "Special Considerations" S overlay zone already in effect on the site. This approach would have the advantage of continuing to allow a wide range of commercial uses if the City ever decided to sell or lease all or a portion of the warehouse for commercial uses, but might have unintended consequences of dispersing cultural facilities into service-commercial or light-industrial areas inappropriate for such uses; or 2. Amend the General Plan and rezoning the site to allow Retail-Commercial (C-R-S-H) uses. The Railroad Square area adjacent to the RTC site is already zoned C-R-S-H and allows a broad range of retail, tourist, residential and commercial uses, reflecting the historic mixed- use character of the railroad area. The C-R zone would allow the proposed uses while retaining a broad range of uses typically allowed in commercial zones. C-R allows museums "by right" and would not require a use permit to establish a museum or to modify the museum use. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5325-01 2. Initial Environmental Study, ER 14-00 3. Planning Commission Staff Report 4. Draft Council Resolution 5. Draft Ordinance jh[1 Jgeneralplan/ccreportRTC 11-20-01 /-3 - Attachment 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5325-01 - A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND THE ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING (C-S-S-H) TO PUBLIC (PF) FOR THE RAILROAD TRANSPORATION CENTER AND THE SAN LUIS OBISPO RAILROAD MUSEUM AT 950 HIGH STREET APPLICATION #GP/R 14-00 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on October 10, 2001, for the purpose of considering Application GP/R 14-00, a staff-initiated request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map to change the designation from Services and Manufacturing (C-S-S-H) to Public Facilities (PF) for the Railroad Transportation Center and the San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding the project; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration of environmental impact prepared for the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments are necessary to accommodate uses planned and approved as part of the Railroad District Plan. 2. The proposed amendments will clarify development requirements within the Railroad Historic District. 3. The proposed amendments will encourage public- and tourist-serving uses by allowing cultural facilities not currently allowed under the Services and Manufacturing designation and C-S-H zone. /�Ll ATTACHMENT 9 Resolution No. 5325-01 Page 2 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the General Plan to provide adequate parking and provide support services for the railroad passengers and related businesses in the Railroad Area, and will allow the Planning Commission to address special land use or compatibility issues through use permit review prior to establishing a museum or other conditionally allowed land use. Section 2. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the following amendments: 1. Amend the General Plan Land Use Map, Attachment 2 (excerpt), to change the property's designation from Services and Manufacturing to Public; and 2. Rezone the site from C-S-H to PF-H, as shown in Attachment 3. On a motion by Commr. Caruso, seconded by Commr. Aiken, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commrs. Caruso, Aiken, Osborne, Peterson, Cooper, and Boswell. NOES: None REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commr. Loh. The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 10th day of October, 2001. Michael Draze Planning CeKmission Secretary Attachments - Attachmerrt 2 �ililll lllll�llllll�lll�����; � L - c� Of SAn hugs OBISPO 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM FOR ER 14-00 1. Project Title: Railroad Transportation Center General Plan and Zoning Amendments (GP/R 14- 00) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm St., San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner. (805) 781-7176. 4. Project Location: 950 High Street (see attached map). 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: None. 6. General Plan Designation: Services and Manufacturing 7. Zoning: C-S-S-H 8. Description of the Project: City-initiated request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map to allow a railroad museum on City-owned property being developed for public parking and support facilities for Amtrak railroad passengers. 9. Background: This "project" is a General Plan/Zoning map amendment to allow a railroad museum to be developed in connection with the City's Railroad Transportation Center (RTC). The Center is under construction and due to be completed in Fall 2001. As shown in the approved Railroad District Plan, the City plans to rehabilitate a historic railroad warehouse on the RTC site for use by the San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum, a non-profit organization formed to preserve, display, and interpret the City's railroad heritage. The RTC and proposed museum are on City-owned land and will serve as public facilities. As such, the most appropriate General Plan land use designation and zoning designation is "Public", or PF. The site is currently designated "Services and Manufacturing" "C-S" with special considerations "S" (noise, land use compatibility) and historic district "H" overlay zones. A general plan amendment and rezoning is necessary to bring City land use and zoning designation in line with the property's anticipated land uses. The site's current Services and Manufacturing designation (C-S-S-H) does not allow museums. Under the General Plan, the City plans for and designates appropriate locations for various types of public and cultural facilities, and these locations are designated "Public" on the Land Use AMchmerd 4 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. /�� ATTACHMENT 2 Element Map and zoned PF on the Official Zoning Map. The PF zone is intended to provide for the wide range of public uses likely to be located on public property, such as government offices, public parking, social services, museums and other cultural facilities. Public uses are generally those uses conducted by governmental or nonprofit agencies. However this zone also allows complementary private and commercial uses that, within the overall guidance of the General Plan, provide a public benefit, such as food concessions in connection with a museum. The proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element text. The changes would promote General Policies that encourage cultural and public-serving uses to be located in PF zones. Moreover, the amendments would allow the railroad museum to be located in the Railroad Historic District, consistent with the Railroad District Plan and General Plan policies encouraging preservation and reuse of historic buildings. The amendments would change the type of development on the site by limiting uses primarily to government-related and public-service uses. 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The site area is approximately 2 acres. It is a long and narrow parcel that slopes from the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way on the east towards Santa Barbara Street on the west. Existing slope banks along Santa Barbara Street are about 1.8 to 2 meters (5.9 to 6.56 feet) high adjacent to the Railroad Square building and diminish in height as you move southward. The historic Southern Pacific Freight Warehouse is located along the eastern boundary of the site. 11. Project Entitlements Requested: None. 12. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. �i CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKUST 2001 /- 7 ATTACHMENT 2 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. Aesthetics Geology/Soils Public Services Agricultural Resources Hazards&Hazardous Recreation Materials Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Transportation&Traffic Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Utilities and Service S stems Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Energy and Mineral Population and Housing Resources FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish X 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 Lcirculated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). `� CITY OF SAN LUIS Owspo 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and X 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 revisions in the project have been made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and agreed to by the project proponent. 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 "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. 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, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Prepared By: ' kh August 16,2001 Je o o ' to Planner Date �l/6l b �7` andevil e,Community Development Director Date CITY of SAN LUIS OBISPo 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I. 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. The explanation of each issue should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any,used to evaluate each question.. 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) of the California Administrators Code. 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. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached,and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following: a► Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. 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 earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. mar CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 Al IAGHMENT 2 Issues, Discussion and Suppoi Information Sources Sources P y Potentially Less Than No Sty _ cant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated 1.AESTHETICS. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 3 --X-- The project would not have a physical effect on the environment, since it would change the range of allowed uses to reflect primarily public-serving uses planned at the Railroad Transportation Center and Museum. The amendments would not allow any specific development project or grant exceptions from City development standards. Development of a museum in the PF zone requires Planning Commisson use permit approval which allows the City to evaluate land use and design issues including land use compatibility, access and parking,and other features of the use. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Railroad District Plans conceptual development plan which shows multi-modal transportation center and railroad museum at this site and which was evaluated for environmental impacts under an initial environmental study ER 31-98,which is included herein by reference under "Sources" below. b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited 3 --X-- to,trees,rock outcroppings,open space,and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 3 __X__ the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would 3 --X-- adversely effect day of nighttime views in the area? 2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of 3 __X__ Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a 3 _X_ Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to 3 --X-- their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 3. AIR QUALITY. Would theproject: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 3 existing or projected air quality violation? b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 3 _X_ quality plan? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 3 __X__ concentrations? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 3 __X__ people? e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria 3 --X— pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative �r CrrY OF SAN Luis 0stsro 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL.CHECKLIST 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 Issues, Discussion and Suppor Information Sources Sources Po• , Potentially Less Than No Sig ,rat Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or indirectly or 3 —X-- through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect,on any riparian habitat or 3 _X_ other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting 3 _X__ biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance(e.g.Heritage Trees)? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident 3 __X__ or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation 3 _X_ Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? f) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected 3 --X-- wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,but not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,etc.) through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? 5.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 3 --X-- historic resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 3 --X-- archeological resource?(See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource 3 __X__ or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred outside of 3 --X-- formal cemeteries? 6. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the ro'ect: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 3 --X-- b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient 3 __X__ manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource 3 that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would theproject: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 3 --X-- effects,including risk of loss, injury or death involving: I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated in the 3 --X-- most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 7 INMAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 Issues, Discussion and Suppot information Sources Sources Pr y Potentially trss Than No Sig._..cant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated issued by the State Geologist for the area,or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 3 __X__ III. Seismic related ground-failure,including liquefaction? 3 __X__ IV. Landslides or mudflows? 3 - _X_ b X— b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 3 _X__ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that 3 __X__ would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on or off site landslides,lateral spreading,subsidance, liquefaction,or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the 3 Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the r('ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 3 -X-- though the routine use,transport or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 3 __X.. through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely 3 _.X__ hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous 3 _X_ emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances,or waste? e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous 3 --X-- materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 659625 and,as a result,it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? f) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 3 __X__ two miles of a public airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of,or physically interfere with,the 3 --X-- adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose,injury, 33 ._X__ or death,involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands? 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the ro'ect: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 3 _X_ requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 3 --X-- substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level(eg.The production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support Cmr OF SAN Luis Oatspo 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 / -13 ATTACHMENT .2 Issues, Discussion and Suppor Information Sources Sources Pc r 'y Potentially Less Than No Sigi....cant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the 3 —X— capacity of existing or planned storm-water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 3 --X-- area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or 3 area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on 3 --X-- a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which 3 --X-- would impede or redirect flood flows? h) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 3 —X-- 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING- Would theproject: a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of 3 --X-- an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b) Physically divide an established community? 3 --X-- c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X-- community conservationplans? 11.NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of"unacceptable"noise 3 —X-- levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element,or general noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance? b) A substantial temporary,periodic,or permanent increase in 3 --X-- ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome 3 vibration or or groundborne noise levels? d) For a project located within an airport land use plan,or within 3 —X— two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 33 (for example example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people 3 --X-- necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. 13.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the prgiect result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the �� CITY OF SAN Luis OsisPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 I ATTACH MENT Issues, Discussion and Suppo. nformation Sources Sources P- I Potentially Less Than No Sib__. .at Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated provision,or need,of new or physically altered government facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times,or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 3 --X-- b) Police protection? 3 --X-- c) Schools? 3 —X-- d) Parks? 3 --X-- e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? --X-- f) Other public facilities? 3 --X- 14. RECREATION. Would theproject: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 3 --X-- other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or 33 --X-- expansion of recreational facilities,which aright have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 3 —X-- existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? b) Exceed,either individually or cumulatively,a level of service 3 --X-- standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features(e.g.sharp 3 —X-- curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g. farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 3 —X-- e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? 3 --X-- f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative 3 --X-- transportation(e.g.bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? g) Conflict with the with San Luis Obispo County Airport Land 3 —X— Use Plan resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards,noise, or a change in air trafficpatterns? 16.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would theproject: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 3 --X-- Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water 3 --X-- treatment,wasterwater treatment,or storm drainage facilities, Elie construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project 3 —X-- from existing entitlements and resources,or are new and expanded water resources needed? d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider 3 —X-- which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand and addition to the provider's existing commitment? e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 3 —X— accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? CITY OF SAN LUIS Omspo 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 / -/ Al TACHMENT 2 Issues, Discussion and Suppor, riformation Sources Sources Pcy Potentially Less Than No Sig,....cant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact ER # 14-00 Mitigation Incorporated f) Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations 3 --X-- related to solid waste? 17.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 3 —X-- 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 prehisto ? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but 3 --X-- 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) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause 3 —X— substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? iii CRY OF SAN Luis Osispo 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 18.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.City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element Update FEIR,August 1994,available in the Community Development Department,City Hall,San Luis Obispo,California.. 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. All of the above checklist factors were addressed by the previous EIR. 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. 19. SOURCE REFERENCES 1. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Digest,Community Development Department(undated) 2. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations,Community Development Department,February 18,2000. 3. Initial Environmental Study on the Railroad District Plan(ER 31-98),Community Dev.Dept.,June 1998 4. 5. Attachment: 1. Vicinity Map: 950 High Street, showing the Railroad Transportation Center and site to be rezoned to PF. REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS No mitigation or monitoring required. JhWenvironment/ER 111-01 �� CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKusT 2001 -n 0-44 2^ y -a 003-651-011 i El 10 9 ET % m R-2 _ 003-651_009 uj ❑p m LU s� ) Lj— ElI i y i L-j� C-S-H �� �`5_2 fxY \, `\� ; -2- - i 4 1 o L HIGH \ P,3! r-- 01 C -S \ ,4" 2 R-2-S Vicii n ty, General Plan Amendment/Rezoning Railroad Transportation Center and SLO Railroad Museum N 950 High Street A0 90 180 270 Feet GP/R 14-00 Attachment 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT ITEM# FROM: John Mandeville, Community. Development Director MEETING DATE: 8/22/01 Prepared By: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner FILE NUMBER: GP/R 14-00 PROJECT ADDRESS: 950 High Street SUBJECT: City-initiated request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map to change the designation from Services and Manufacturing (C-S-S-H) to Public (PF) for the Railroad Transportation Center and the San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the Council amend the General Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map to accommodate the planned Railroad Transportation Center and San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum. BACKGROUND Situation/Previous Review Last year the City Council approved plans and specifications and a construction contract for the development of the new Railroad Transportation Center (RTC), a 121- space public parking lot in the Railroad Historic District. That facility is expected to be completed in Fall 2001 and will serve Amtrak passengers, nearby businesses, bicyclists, bus passengers, and visitors. As shown in the approved Railroad District Plan, the RTC will include a Railroad Historic Museum to be developed in the historic Southern Pacific Freight Warehouse. The Council has allocated approximately $450,000 in state transportation funds for the historic warehouse's rehabilitation as a museum and the City has entered into a contract with a local architectural firm to prepare plans and specifications for the project. The RTC and proposed museum are on City-owned land and will serve as public facilities. As such, staff believes the most appropriate General Plan land use designation and zoning designation is "Public", or PF. The site is currently designated "Services and Manufacturing" "C-S" with special considerations "S" (noise, land use compatibility) and historic district "H" overlay zones. A general plan amendment and rezoning is necessary to bring City land use and zoning designations in line with the property's anticipated uses. Data Summary Applicant: City of San Luis Obispo Zoning: C-S-S-H General Plan: Commercial - Service Environmental status: Negative Declaration ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 Site Description The site area is approximately 2 acres. It is a long and narrow parcel that slopes from the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way on the east towards Santa Barbara Street on the west. Adjacent uses include offices, restaurants, shops and railroad depot to the north, dwellings to the east and west, and service-commercial uses to the south. The historic Southern Pacific Freight Warehouse is located along the eastern boundary of the site. EVALUATION Under the General Plan, the City plans for and designates appropriate locations for various types of public and cultural facilities, and these locations are designated "Public" on the Land Use Element Map and zoned PF on the Official Zoning Map. The PF zone allows the wide range of uses likely to be located on public property, such as government offices, public parking, social services, museums and cultural facilities. Public uses are generally those uses conducted by governmental or nonprofit agencies. However this zone also allows complementary private and commercial uses that, within the overall guidance of the General Plan, provide a public benefit such as food concessions in connection with a museum. The RTC will provide these facilities: 1. vehicle parking for existing and anticipated AMTRAK patrons. 2. new San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum within the former railroad warehouse. 3. vehicle parking for the uses to be housed within historic railroad warehouse. 4. Provide bus parking for the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) as a "layover facility." 5. Provide pedestrian and bicycle connections to and through the site. 6. Provide opportunities for the display and movement of historic rail cars and equipment. Why General PlanlZoning Amendments are Proposed. The RTC property's C-S-S-H zoning allows "parking as a principal use" but does not allow museums. Consequently, amendments are proposed to allow the San Luis Obispo Railroad Museum to be located at the RTC site. Three zones allow museums: PF, C-C and C-R. Of these, staff believes PF is most appropriate for the RTC because it reflects the predominantly public-serving nature of the use and will be compatible with adjacent C-S uses. Museums are allowed in the PF zone, subject to approval of a Planning Commission use permit. Parking as a principal use is also allowed in the PF zone, subject to an administrative use permit. Incidental uses related to the primary public uses, such as small food concessions, caretaker's quarters, public meeting rooms and exhibits, and other related public-serving uses are also allowed or conditionally allowed in the PF zone. ALTERNATIVES Staff supports the recommended amendments because they are tailored to be site- and use- specific. However there are alternatives the Commission may wish to consider. The RTC and ATTACHMENT 3 Page 3 Railroad Museum could also be accommodated by: 1. Amending the General Plan and rezoning the site to allow Retail-Commercial (C-R-S-H) uses. The Railroad Square area adjacent to the RTC site is already zoned C-R-S-H and allows a broad range of retail, tourist, residential and commercial uses, reflecting the historic mixed-use character of the railroad area. The C-R zone would allow the proposed uses while retaining a broad range of uses typically allowed in commercial zones. C-R allows museums "by right" and would not require a use permit to establish a museum or to modify the museum use. 2. Retaining the site's current land use designation and zoning and amending the Zoning Regulations to allow museums in the C-S zone, subject to use permit approval. Under the current zoning, use permit approval is required for any new use anyway, due to the "S" overlay zone already in effect. However because this change would apply to all C-S zoned sites, use permit review would be appropriate to allow museum proposals to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. This approach would continue to allow a wide range of commercial uses — an advantage over PF if the City ever decided to sell or lease all or a portion of the RTC or Warehouse for commercial use. The disadvantage is that this broad a change could tend to disperse cultural facilities to areas outside of the Downtown area, which would conflict with General Plan goals. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission take the following actions, and based on the following findings: 1. Amend the General Plan Land Use Map, Attachment 2 (excerpt), to change the property's designation from Services and Manufacturing to Public; and 2. Rezone the site from C-S-S-H to PF-H, as shown in Attachment 3. Findings 1. The proposed amendments are necessary to accommodate uses planned and approved as part of the Railroad District Plan. 2. The proposed amendments will clarify development requirements within the Railroad Historic District. 3. The proposed amendments will encourage public- and tourist-serving uses by allowing cultural facilities not currently allowed under the Services and Manufacturing designation and C-S-S-H zone. 1-21 ATTAGHIMF��� Page 4 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the General Plan to provide adequate parking and provide support services for the railroad passengers and related businesses in the Railroad Area, and will allow the special land use or compatibility issues to be addressed through use permit review prior to establishing a museum or other conditionally allowed land use. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Proposed General Plan Land Use Map Amendment 3. Zoning Map Amendment 4. Initial Environmental Study, ER 14-00 Jh/URaikoaW/GP/R14-00 Attachment 4 RESOLUTION NO. (2001 Series) - -- A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 950 HIGH STREET FROM SERVICES AND MANUFACTURING TO PUBLIC (GP/R 14-00). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 10, 2001 and adopted Resolution No. 5325-01 recommending approval of a city-initiated amendment to the General Plan to change the land use designation of property located at 950 High Street from Services and Manufacturing to Public; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on November 20, 2001 and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action,and the project evaluation and recommendations of staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the initial environmental study and negative declaration prepared by the Community Development Director for the proposed amendment and reviewed by the Planning Commission; BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council hereby affirms the Community Development Director's negative declaration of environmental impact for the proposed General Plan amendment (ER 14-00). SECTION 2. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the proposed amendment, the Planning Commissions recommendations, staff recommendations, public testimony, and reports thereof, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and is necessary to accommodate uses planned and approved as part of the Railroad District Plan. 2. The proposed amendments will clarify development requirements within the Railroad Historic District. 3. The proposed amendments will encourage public- and tourist-serving uses by allowing cultural facilities not currently allowed under the Services and Manufacturing designation and C-S zone. 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the General Plan to provide adequate parking and provide support services for the railroad passengers and related businesses in the Railroad Area, and will allow the Planning Commission to address special land use or compatibility issues through use permit review prior to establishing a museum or other conditionally allowed use. ? � ATTACHMENT 4 Resolution No. (2001 Series) Page 2 SEMON 3. General Plan Amendment. The Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use Map as shown in Exhibit A. 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 ,2001. Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: Lee Price, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jfr . Jo gen , City Attorney Exhibit A: Proposed General Plan Land Use Map Amendment JWUresandord/RTCrcs 11-20-01 i-a y \ l+; 16, � X AL t a' •+v„'1;: r yw=�;camc�. Sar r { `�\ \/' I r >„ti \ a� Attachment 5 ORDINANCE NO. (2001 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FROM C-S-S-H TO PF-H FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 950 HIGH STREET (GP/R/ER 14-00) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 10, 2001, and recommended approval of the amendment to the site's zoning; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on November 20, 2001 and has considered testimony of other interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed revisions are consistent with the General Plan, the purposes of the Zoning Regulations and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered an initial environmental study on the proposed General Plan amendment and rezoning. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby affirms the Community Development Director's negative declaration of environmental impact for the proposed zoning change (ER 14-00). SECTION 2. The City Council makes the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments are necessary to accommodate uses planned and approved as part of the Railroad District Plan. 2. The proposed amendments will clarify development requirements within the Railroad Historic District. 3. The proposed amendments will encourage public- and tourist-serving uses by allowing cultural facilities not currently allowed under the Services and Manufacturing designation and C-S zone. 4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the General Plan to provide adequate parking and provide support services for the railroad passengers and related businesses in the Railroad Area, and will allow the Planning Commission to address special land use or compatibility issues through use permit review prior to establishing a museum or other conditionally allowed land use. SECTION 3. The Zoning Regulations Map Amendment (R 14-00) is hereby approved and the property at 950 High Street rezoned to PF-H as shown on Exhibit A. SECTION 3. 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, l-2& - - ATTACHMENT .5 Ordinance No. (2001 Series) Page 2 in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of the thirty (30)days after its final passage. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of , 2001, on a 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: Of qty oM Je org en Exhibit A: Proposed Rezoning A/Uresandord/RTCord 11-20-01 l-z7 100j , / -0 d, o'' tAKI 15 l0 a- \ !f 3-H 0 -O 70 10 O A° Oi G 1°a �D 6 G��1di1` .0 C-S-S- 2 a s �0 R C- -S-H ' 10' Oral 2 O C- -S- R-2-Sp � s - ,�2` C-S-S- $ � a �° �15►�° 10 1880 REZONE FROM 6,C-S-S-H TO PF-H R-2 �9. 19� v�iyw' a � �A\ k�ir� r � � ...... ... _... ....-.... _.. .. ...._._.... _....... .. _ .......� ... .. Attachment 3 N. �$ (2024) J � _ N 2000 2009 2 NOTE TO USER The building locations and number of units shown on these maps may not be accurate or city o� san Luis os�spo w reRect the legal status.and.should be used as a �1 4 ,...'''.'11'a'�,..'�'^,,h S reference only. 'f -rrat [K-1OapP�5imo1/Poa�00aB810p5OO JUNE 1999 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 20 0 20 40 60 8o 100 Meters �xh►h �-t A -S-;S- O9�A ° i REZONE FROM C-S-S-H TO PF-H 2000 2008 2001 A: 2006 2005 2006 2010 B 2015 2013 2014 2021 2034 R-2 2017 2022 1940 '} 2040 2030 2041 3 _ 2043 N 45 2035 2040 1960 2048 W 2047 2049 .2047 V 2052 2050 2055 Q 980 A_B 2056 2058 A-B 2054 2067 2064 C_ _ 2075 2072 i 2090 - C-S-H. 2095 2080 1998 2098. of rn_ m m HIGH RACHEL 9 zlzs „ m ach ent 3 C- -S- R-2-S i C-S-H N N FLOP i � m I N N 2155 I_,72.