HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/01/2002, BUS1 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ORCUTT AREA Mea�int D.�e
council Oct. 1, 2002
AGEnVA PepoRt It.N.Abe.�S�
CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direc %
Prepared By: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ORCUTT AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN (ER 209-98).
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Endorse the proposed project description and recommended alternatives, and direct staff to
proceed with the environmental review process, subject to funding by the project proponents.
DISCUSSION
Background on Process
The Land Use Element of the General Plan (LU 1.13.33) requires City adoption of a specific
plan for the Orcutt Area, before any part of it is annexed or developed under City jurisdiction
(vicinity map, Attachment #1). A specific plan shows proposed land uses, public facilities, and
design standards in more detail than the General Plan, but in less detail than subdivision maps
and construction plans. A specific plan helps coordinate development and open space protection
for relatively large areas that involve several landowners and many years from start to
completion of development.
In December 1998 Cannon Associates, acting on behalf of four property owners, applied for City
approval of a specific plan and associated General Plan amendments, and annexation, for the
Orcutt Area. The initial application included a draft specific plan. In response to area property
owners' concerns and City staff comments, Cannon Associates has prepared several sets of
revisions to the initial draft, resulting in the current proposal.
On July 16, 2002, the City Council had been scheduled to consider a General Plan amendment
request to allow multiple plans for the area, and a project description suggested by staff in
response to an apparent impasse among Orcutt Area owners in agreeing on a preferred project.
The matter was continued at the request of Orcutt Area owners,with no discussion of the specific
plan itself. Since then, the General Plan amendment request has been withdrawn, and staff has
been informed that all owners have accepted the current proposal as a means to start formal
public review (attachments#2 and#3).
1-/
Council Agenda Report-Orcutt Area environmental review
Page 2
Principal Issues in the Orcutt Area
1. Residential density and capacity
For the Orcutt Area the General Plan identifies a "low" capacity of 500 dwellings, and a "high"
capacity of 700 dwellings with transfer of development credit (TDC). In the early 1990's, TDC
was seen as a way to help secure the greenbelt, by shifting development potential from
designated open space areas to identified residential expansion areas. TDC now appears less
likely to be a practical tool than initially intended. Also, reduction of planned housing capacity in
the Margarita Area and State-proposed housing targets indicate a need for additional housing
capacity where it can reasonably be found. The current Orcutt proposal has a capacity of 860 to
960 dwellings (somewhat less if a school is developed in the area), which would require
amending the General Plan. About 70 percent of the dwellings would be in the medium-density,
medium-high-density, and high-density categories, which allow a range of small-lot or attached
housing forms. The proposed number of dwellings for the Orcutt Area is within the maximum
allowed by the recent amendment of the County Airport Land Use Plan, which at a gross density
of six dwellings per acre would be about 1,300 dwellings overall.
2. Elementary school
In consideration of the substantial residential development planned in the southern part of the
community, the school district has asked that a site for an elementary school be designated in the
Orcutt Area. If the average student generation per dwelling continues to decline, it will be
several years before the school will be needed. If it turns out that Sinsheimer, Hawthorne, and
Los Ranchos elementary schools are adequate for build-out enrollment, land reserved for the
school would be available for residential development. However, if this potential site were to be
developed with housing sooner, the school district would have virtually no options for a new
elementary campus in the southern part of the city.
The recently amended Airport Land Use Plan says schools should not be allowed in areas where
aircraft often operate at 500 to 1000 feet above the ground, including the Orcutt Area. Adopting a
specific plan that allows a school would therefore require the City to override the Airport Land
Use Commission, or the Airport Land Use Commission to amend its plan. Actually, the school
site need not be shown in the specific plan for the school district to acquire it and build a school.
However, the district's site acquisition is subject to approval by the California Department of
Transportation, Division of Aeronautics. Though the Airport Land Use Plan does not bind the
Division of Aeronautics, that plan will be a strong influence.
While the question of a school site has not been resolved, showing the reservation in the project
description at least allows the option to be evaluated in the EIR, without committing the City, the
school district, or the Airport Land Use Commission to a specific course of action.
3. Open space and parks
The current proposal shows low-density houses on the northern flank of the hill, in an area that
/-L
Council Agenda Report—Orcutt Area environmental review
Page 3
the General Plan designates as Open Space. The General Plan will need to be amended as part of
the specific plan process unless Council directs that this feature be deleted from the project
description. Unless eliminated at this time, the EIR will evaluate the impact of this change.
City policy calls for 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents in major annexations, with five
acres per 1,000 to be developed as a neighborhood park. The current proposal shows adequate
park space (19 acres) for the lower number of estimated dwellings (860). The higher number
(960) would require 21 total acres of parkland. These figures assume that the creek corridors
through the neighborhood park and the linear park would be counted as park rather than as open
space (and that about five acres of neighborhood park would overlap the school's playfields).
General Plan policies (OS 3.2.1.A, OS 3.2.1.E) and Table 3 and Table 4 of the Open Space
Element generally discourage the use of creek corridors as required parkland. The EIR will look
at specific creek corridor conditions and connectivity requirements between proposed parkland
and this might lead to a recommendation to allow some of the creek corridor as parkland. It may
also be possible to credit some of the hillside open space as parkland. Council can give general
direction now, or wait until the project returns with the EIR.
4. Road and trail connections
The current proposal in your agenda does not show the public or private streets that would be
expected to provide access throughout the area. The General Plan Circulation Element policies,
beginning with Cl 8.2: Specific Plans, encourage street layouts that provide multiple points of
access to the Orcutt Area, while discouraging cut-through traffic between the Johnson Avenue
area and the Edna-Islay Area. City staff and the project proponents will jointly develop a map
showing the system of collector and local streets to assure proper circulation analysis prior to
proceeding with the traffic assessment study as part of the EIR.
The City's Bicycle Transportation Plan shows four paths separate from roads through the Orcutt
Area. The current proposal shows one in its entirety, along the railroad, and part of another, from
the railroad trail to the northeastern corner of the proposed neighborhood park. Not shown are a
connection from Willow Circle along a creek to the northern leg of Orcutt Road at Femwood
Drive, and two routes generally paralleling creeks from the proposed neighborhood park to the
eastern leg of Orcutt Road. (There appear to be options to the proposed path alignment that
would avoid creek crossings, which should be examined in the EIR.) While it is not shown in the
Bicycle Transportation Plan, General Plan policy LU 2.3.2 encourages a pedestrian and bicycle
grade-separated crossing of the railroad at Industrial Way to link the trails, residential
development, and sports fields in the Margarita Area, and the trails, residential development, and
future elementary school in the Orcutt Area, while avoiding the intersection of Tank Farm Road
and Broad Street. This will also provide convenient neighborhood access to the Marigold
Center, where neighborhood services and jobs are located.
5. Storm drainage
The current proposal shows storm drainage detention areas. The City's proposed master drainage
plan involving the Airport, Margarita, and Orcutt areas proposes a regional detention facility near
Buckley Road, with any detention upstream from that facility being a temporary measure. The
Orcutt Area owners want to provide permanent detention facilities within the Orcutt Area that
�-3
Council Agenda Report—Orcutt Area environmental review
Page 4
will serve their development, and not have to pay for downstream detention. Proposed facilities
for the Airport Area are being re-evaluated for potential cost reductions. The EIR should evaluate
both options and determine which would have the least environmental impacts.
Specific Plan Features Recommended for Further Evaluation
Agreement among the Orcutt Area owners concerning basic features for a specific plan is a major
milestone. However, some of the aspects that they have agreed on are not consistent with City
policies, or they differ from previous staff recommendations. The EIR should address these as
alternative features:
A. Complying with the current General Plan residential capacities (500 to 700 dwellings);
B. Complying with the General Plan Land Use Element map, which shows as Open Space land
south of the creek near Calle Crotala;
C. Providing total parkland at rate of 10 acres per 1,000 residents for the higher(960 dwellings)
estimate;
D. Providing through access, or cul-de-sacs of acceptable length, for all developable land in the
specific plan area;
E. Providing bicycle and pedestrian paths as shown in the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan;
F. Providing a grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the railroad at Industrial Way;
G. Revising path alignment to minimize creek crossings.
H. Following the proposed master drainage plan by contributing to off-site (Airport Area) storm
drainage detention.
Next Steps
If Council takes the recommended action, and the project proponents wish to proceed, the
following would be the expected next steps.
Staff and project proponents complete project circulation plan. End of 2002
A public meeting to discuss the scope of the EIR is held,and the scope is decided. End of 2002
The EIR is prepared and published for review. Spring 2003
A revised draft specific plan is prepared and published for review. Summer
2003
The package is referred to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). Summer
2003
The Planning Commission and City Council hold hearings on the EIR and draft Fall 2003
specific plan, and any necessary General Plan amendments.
The EIR is certified, and the specific plan and General Plan amendments are Winter 2004
adopted (reflecting Council-approved changes resulting from public hearings and
ALUC comments).
CONCURRENCES
The general concerns of all City departments are reflected in the discussion above. The Public
Works Department will be involved in the project circulation plan alternatives. Various
Council Agenda Report—Orcutt Area environmental review
Page 5
departments are expected to make more detailed recommendations as the EIR is prepared and the
draft specific plan is refined.
FISCAL IMPACT
Orcutt Area owners are paying a consultant to prepare the draft specific plan and have paid City
application fees for the specific plan, General Plan amendments, annexation, and for
administrative costs of conducting environmental review. By Council policy, application fees are
expected to cover about 45 percent of processing costs. The Council has previously budgeted for
consultant services to help staff bring the specific plan through hearings. Those funds are being
spent as provided in a previously approved agreement.
Normally, applicants for development projects pay for environmental review. Area owners have
asked the City to partly fund preparation of the EIR, with costs to be recovered through fees at
the time of development. When the City has helped fund environmental review, the
circumstances have been different. As the applicant for annexation of the Airport Area and the
Margarita Area, the City contributed general fund money for preparation of the EIR for the
Airport Area and Margarita Area specific plans. However, even when the City was the applicant,
the General Fund contribution was only about 10 percent of the total cost. The remaining cost
was covered by grants, property-owner contributions, and enterprise funds (water and
wastewater) due to citywide facilities plans being included in the planning effort. The City is
preparing the initial study for rezoning of the property south of Orcutt Road, between Broad
Street and the railroad,because the City initiated that rezoning.
The EIR is expected to cost about $100,000. No City funds have been budgeted for an Orcutt
Area EIR. Given the City's current cost recovery policy and the significant differences between
this request and other situations where the City has helped fund EIRs, staff recommends that the
EIR be funded entirely by the owners. In adopting the specific plan, the City could establish fees
that would reimburse owners who front the EIR costs, collected from other owners who pursue
development in the future.
ALTERNATIVES
With the recommended action, the basic land uses and circulation features shown in the attached
map and tables would be refined and evaluated in the EIR and would provide direction to the
proponents' consultant in revising the draft specific plan. Council may give direction on features
to be included in, or excluded from, the project description. Such Council direction does not
constitute approval or denial. All proposed features and alternatives will return, by way of the
Planning Commission, for future public hearings at the City Council. Council may also decide to
continue action.
Attachments #1 - Orcutt Area Vicinity Map
#2 - Map"Specific Plan"
#3 -Tables "Development Potential" and "Public Dedications"
Council Reading File: Color map (11"x 17") of current proposal OrcuttkarOctl.doc
� N
ornmom
«�jj���`►
•� �i°j°j11�j°i /
0 UL
1111♦ ♦ � ., i
� � ►111 °.` � '
'�■■■■mow+ . ''
wl Orcutt
;; Area
LEM
v�
1i"' ; � 4Y71,'�•y.,.�"•'#10��`}f'�'�t� phi"�"q� ... : • _.
�•�'h '�-rrw• ��j i
/ - I
i I rt
n
� I
Attachment 3 D=
L
Egg
MIR
m -
a S
s a
0 5 s b.R
Lg 0
a
$ C�C
m U w Z W w g2 n
� w m Oa OQ m L .mr m
i.J w c X 3 � m Fi- 0pq� m
U f.F4< m[ N H N w w U 0 0 V. m
F W d pw O O q m m W W p~< { cc
OZj Z•J V
O O>W
An
60p6 X O 3 6 m _w
AZ _ r _L
m O m w m J O O O
< a + n+ v
f m o'
o OJ m s! mtp O
> < m w m
o p ! §
p wW' $ ny m z m5 m
2 a c
w 0 m o w o > [n m
Z e c n o a m Z p Q S 4 $ c x
g � �rghsm Ab g � am � s
CL
Q V Q C ^ m m > >
9 Z w m O N a • X + q C N
J[O OW c WLLO Nmom
U)
F -1 Z3 W 0c
W a 1. ' m <a� V n C o Ir
6
IL
z W> muj > >
W UJ w `f >. `m m G m p W U Q e
V5 .§
$ a m VJ
Qd' a t 8 mg w B m � QV oa Eo s -
is QO .� $ mK m m mo FFAX o E .� 1
W C W q m O y M F
yUW eta p� a a m m Ua NO 06 E 8X � � O
OO ¢W q ' m o E = „ Q ¢< Xk 5 m m e7
n E � mn
= ry $8 0o F m cc
-am
w c. n 5 m p mp E y m a m i °1 '2
E o o n $ m
¢O = 0 a m u w 0 U r t w
i O
J O m
C vi
p < cm oW w
m n 6 ;A w:3
o e $ w $ S -
c 0 mme S m Op m3m w m o � o
7
w !Em m m E qm m o c
L E0 w m O w 5 m
K� mj5
W . O<
A $ G O m W 0 O
m e m c m E < E c C c
E
9 m oOm � L r• y $ n0 mo m
.. v m 5
C; W
- OJ W m [ n m m m1O
V p E
�u <: ; 82nc ofig O�Fjm mo mc � omn
p< c m o m c m w Q 10 Z C
� $ ao m no o $ � •- N ene
w a E gmnw � �.s'
mm .
.
N A Q N W
/ 4
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
October 1, 2002 DATE iO-ITEM #4L
Orcutt Area Landowners requested language for adoption by City Council
Re: Orcutt Annexation Area Specific Plan
The City Council recognizes the need for additional housing in the City of San Luis
Obispo. The City's General Plan calls for the ultimate annexation of the Orcutt Area to be
developed as a residential neighborhood:
The council hereby endorses the concept of amending the City's General Plan by
increasing the number of allowed new housing units in the Orcutt Area to between 850
and 950.
Further, the City accepts the attached draft exhibits as the basis for proceeding with
necessary studies, finalizing a draft Specific Plan, and preparing an environmental
analysis. It is understood that additional General Plan amendments may be required, that
related circulation issues remain to be finalized during this review process, and that this
conceptual acceptance for processing is not meant to be binding on the property owners
in detail at this time.
It is also recognized that many of the owners will be designating "home sites" which are
intended to protect their existing residences until they choose to develop at some future
date.
RECEIVED
OCT O1 2002
SLO CITY CLERK
C
reLEORKICRIG
FIN Din
FIRE CHIEF
RNEY ❑ PW DIR
O POLICE CHF
DS ❑ REC DIR
❑ uTIL DIR
HR.DIR_
I '
Mr.d1NG AGENDA
DATE 10 ' ! 'UL ITEM # ,
Barbara Parsons
4650 Portola Rd.
Atascadero,CA. 93422
Telephone: (805)466-9457 -CC E3 COD DIR
CAC El FIN DIR
�CAc C3 FIRE CHIEF
�TTOF..:. Y DPW DIR
LERK JRll3 ❑ MUCEQHF
September 25,2002 ❑ DEPT: LAW Q PRO DIA
[;irk B WIL DIR
Com. F�
Honorable Mayor Settle and Members of the City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,CA. 93401
Re: Orcutt Area Specific Plan October 1,2002 Agenda
1. Approve Project Description and Authorization to Prepare an EIR for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan
2. Request for Supplemental Funds from the City of San Luis Obispo for EIR
Dear Mayor Settle and Council Members:
On October 1,2002,your Council will consider the above matters relative to the Orcutt Area Specific Plan.
Over the last few months the consensus of all 13 property owners has been achieved,resulting in the specifics
submitted for your consideration. We are hopeful of your support and approval of the above two items. I
wish to express my views in regard to the supplemental funding of the Environmental Impact Report,which
is very important to me.
The Orcutt Area Specific Plan consists of approximately 230 acres,21 parcels of property and 13 property
owners. Parcel sizes range fiom our property,which is 144 acres, to the smallest property being less than
3/4 of an acre. Up to this point four property owners have financed preparation of a draft Orcutt Area
Specific Plan. My family has paid the majority of costs towards achieving this plan,and we cannot continue
at this rate without assistance. This.Specific Plan has been no easy task and has required many hours of
meetings involving our planning consultants,Cannon Associates,City Staff and the property owners.
To date,the drift plan has been revised four times,including the addition of a subdivision plan for each of the
21 parcels,which we did not anticipate from the beginning.
A few of the 13 property owners are not interested in annexation or developing d=property,nor are they
able to contribute towards their proportionate cost of the EIR. We cannot be expected to cover costs up front
that would not be reimbursable to us through fees collected by the City as far out as 15 year. It has been
determined that in some instances other Specific Plan property owners in the Airport and Margarita areas
have been given some considerations by the City in regard to the costs of the EIR At this time,we the
property owners of the OASP are requesting the City's financial support for the preparation of the necessary
EIR This support is not only crucial to the cont mred viability of the OASP process,but will demonstrate the
City's commitment to providing the needed housing.
I wish to state that the 144 acres which my parents owned and of which is now solely owned by my daughter
and myself,has been in our family for 63 years. We are not associated with any developers at this time and
we hope that we can see the Orcutt Area Specific Plan to its completion. I would be very disappointed and
saddened if we had to seek other alternatives.
-P 2 5 ti66
W) 01V I ry-,
Mayor Settle and Council Members September 25,2002
Page-2
Housing for the City of San Luis Obispo is a unanimous goal;however we cannot achieve it alone. We must
progress in a positive and timely manner,we are requesting your support.
Sincerely,
Barbara Parsons
by
cc: Council Members:
John Ewan
Jan Howell Marx
Christine Mulholland
Ken Schwartz
Mike Draze,Community Development Department
Andrew Merriam,Cannon Associates
c: loos . alt� lo-m-ao 61112/m
VI •`�/\\\J////� \\V\\ \yy
o
C7 y M I Nd,
OO OM Ni13�
1
�1
1
9
a \ «1 O
z �'
mmc
17,
Pam
Din
it
zl m
N�
cc �JR� tl y xmm ��
7C � y m •
�1 O
C _
1
'! I ♦ ! 1 � G T=8 p it
4 i DD
G ' A L w A
t x l 1+
A L L E CROTA
Z
4p ; 16
ro�4
fit
do
CD
a �
1
O �
m �
Ills a y