HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/28/2004, PH1 - DRAFT MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 9-28-04
council Mwu,Dw
j acEnaa Report I�N=,C i q 1
CITY O F SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: John Mandeville, Director of Community Developme
Prepared By: Michael Draze, Deputy Director, Long-Porks
lannin�
Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Public Director
SUBJECT: DRAFT MARGARITA AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND FINAL PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1) Discuss the draft Margarita Area Specific Plan and Final Program Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), receive public testimony, and provide direction to staff, as appropriate and
continue the public hearing to October 5, 2004.
2) As recommended by the Planning Commission, in a future hearing, certify the EIR and
approve the plan, with Council amendments as appropriate.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Draft Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) and Final Program Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) have been endorsed by the Planning Commission. This specific plan will provide a
bridge between the broad policies of the General Plan and detailed direction for the development
of subdivisions and buildings. At this meeting the Council will be presented with the proposed
types and location of land uses as well as the proposed automobile, transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian circulation. The layout of land uses and circulation, compatibility with the nearby
airport other land uses, and the broader circulation needs of the City are discussed in this report.
The Prado Road alignment is also discussed with detailed analysis in the Prado Road binder
previously provided to each Councilmember. A computer simulation of Prado Road will be
presented at the September 28, 2004 hearing. The report also includes comments on a proposal
by the Damon and Garcia families for ultimate development of their property.
The Council should determine whether or not the specific plan's provisions for land use and
circulation adequately implement the applicable General Plan objectives and policies. If not, the
Council should provide direction to staff to revise the plan to better implement the direction
contained in the General Plan. Council members may wish to rely on the General Plan
conformity analysis that was provided as Attachment 4 of the previous Council agenda report
(September 7 h meeting).
Margarita Area Specific Plan-arid Final EIR- September 28,2004 Page 2
DISCUSSION
Implementing the General Plan
At tonight's meeting, the Council will review the types and location of the proposed project land
uses as well as the proposed automobile, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation. An
understanding of the types, location, and density of the proposed land uses is necessary to fully
consider the role of the proposed circulation plan in fully implementing the General Plan goals
for the Margarita Area.
The Council agenda report for this item in the September 7`f' Council agenda provided an
overview of the proposed specific plan and a detailed analysis of how the specific plan
implements applicable General Plan policies. These include policies that call for the preservation
of natural resources in the area, meeting the City's housing goals, and facilitating the movement
of people and materials through the City. In implementing these policies, the specific plan sets
aside 186 acres of open space resources that the General Plan says should be preserved. The
specific plan provides for 870 new homes of various sizes and types on 70 acres, including
single-family detached and attached houses, apartments, and mixed uses with office and
commercial in a transit-friendly development. Table 1 below lists the uses planned and land area
and residential density of each. In addition to the residential uses, the plan includes about 3
acres of commercial uses, 69 acres of business park, and 26 acres of parkland. The specific plan
emphasizes transit-oriented development (TOD) as a means of maximizing the trip reduction
potential for new development in the area. Both the land use discussion and the circulation
discussion of this report address the subject of TOD. The following section of this report
describes the main determinants of the land use layout. The subsequent section describes the
individual land uses.
Land Use and Circulation Layout
The location of land uses and circulation in the specific plan is not arbitrary. The land use layout
follows a number of important principles. Paramount among those principles are the Land Use
Element and Open Space Element policies that protect the City's natural resources and
determine the location of areas that may be developed. Protected resources in the Margarita
Area include the South Street Hills, riparian and wetland areas, and the wildlife corridor created
by Acacia Creek. (Section 1 of the specific plan establishes the framework for open space and
park development.)
A key development principle of the General Plan is that urban development in the City be
compact, and that land uses be mixed in a way that best meets the needs of City residents and
minimizes the adverse impacts of urban development on the environment. This goal is
accompanied by a goal to reduce dependence on the automobile and shift transportation choice
to alternative modes of travel. This led to designating much of the residential area for housing
at medium or higher density, centered by a community park and neighborhood commercial
center with employment opportunities nearby and opportunities to use alternative modes of
transportation such as transit, bicycling and walking. (Section 3 of the specific plan sets forth
the community design principles which guided the land use layout.)
The highest density residential land uses and public transit stops are located together to minimize
the walking distance to transit services for the greatest number of people. Commercial services n
Margarita Area Specific Plan-and Final EIR- September 28, 2004 Page 3
are centrally located in the planning area to provide the greatest accessibility from all of the
residential areas. The centralized commercial area is served by a transit stop to provide internal
and external access. To help maximize accessibility within the planning area, the central transit
stop is connected by park and bike/pedestrian facilities to residential, open space, and recreation
areas. To draw people to this central area, the specific plan leverages public facilities and
amenities to create a focal point and destination. This is done by combining facilities for transit,
the neighborhood park, and public art. The plan includes 69 acres of land designated as Business
Park to provide a compatible employment center. The combination of residential and
employment uses, and ready access to transit services, will provide future residents with an
opportunity to rely less on the automobile.
Compatibility among adjacent land uses is a principle that determined land uses where different
uses join one another and where the specific plan abuts existing development. To insure
compatibility, the specific plan establishes new land uses that are similar in character and
intensity next to existing land uses. This resulted in the Low Density Residential land use
abutting the existing housing in the Margarita Avenue neighborhood and the medium density-
detached residential abutting the Chumash Village mobile home park. Although the Planning
Commission and Council received requests to move development further from the mobile home
park, the Planning Commission felt strongly that the proposed density of approximately half that
in the adjacent park was adequate to assure compatibility. (Residential densities are discussed in
Section 2 of the specific plan—Development Standards.)
Another major determinant of the land use layout was the agreement between the City and the
Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) established in early 2002. The agreement established
restrictions in land use and development intensity in much of the Margarita Area. This reduced
buildable area and total residential units, moving much of the housing density closer to the South
Street Hills. The agreement also established parameters for design of subdivisions and business
parks. The benefit of the agreement is that much of the development originally envisioned in the
General Plan remained possible. The strong input of the ALUC also provides a greater certainty
that the ALUC will find future development compatible with the adopted Airport Land Use Plan
(ALUP). (Airport compatibility issues are discussed in Section 4 of the specific plan.)
Land Use Summary
Open Space (Sections 1.1-1.5)
Of the Open Space lands in the plan area, 146 acres will be the upper slopes of the South Street
Hills with the remaining 40 acres in creek corridors and the greenspace in the southern part of
the area that is within the Airport's Inner Turning Zone and Zone 4, not suitable for housing or
intense uses.
Parks (Section 1.6)
The project includes about 26 acres for active park use. The 10-acre neighborhood park will
include uses designed to accommodate the people who live nearby while the sports field will
attract people from the wider community as well as the plan area. As noted in the 1998
Margarita Park Financing Plan and 1999 Lease Bond approvals by the Council, the sports field
will be used to offset part of the parks requirement for the Margarita Area.
t , 3
Margarita Area Specific Plan. nd Final EIR- September 28, 2004 Page 4
Residential (Sections 2.1 -2.4)
The General Plan clearly shows the Margarita Area as one of the locations additional housing in
the City will be provided. It also states the City's intent to provide a wide variety of housing
types, pricing, and tenure. Even after it became clear that there would be substantial changes in
the location and number of homes based on Airport Land Use Commission concerns, the concept
of diverse housing was retained. The Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) compromise reduced the
allowed number of residences from a target of 1,200 to around 870 homes. With the overlay of
airport safety zones and noise zone restrictions, it became increasingly difficult to design projects
to even reach the numbers allowed in the ALUP. The Planning Commission made it clear during
their review of the draft plan that diversity of housing types and reaching the 870 home capacity
were higher priority than some other standards that were originally proposed in the draft. To
meet those goals, minor adjustments were made in the development standards to allow more
attached units and more compact design.
Table 1: Margarita Area Specific Plan --Land Use Summa
Area Dwellings
Aver/Acr
Land Use Zqne Acres % e Number
Open Space 186.2 44.8
Hills C/o -SP 146.3 35.2
Na Na
Greens ace C/OS-SP 172 4.1
Creek Corridors C/OS-SP 22.7 5.5
Parks 25.9 6.0
Neighborhood Park PF-SP 9.9 2.4 Na Na
Sorts Fields PF-SP 16.0 3.6
Residential : 70.7 17.0
Low Density R-1-SP 20.6 5.0 7 144
Medium Density-Attached or Detached R-2-SP 35.0 8.4 12 420
Medium Density-Detached Only R-2-SP 5.2 1.3 . .12 62
Medium High Density R-3-SP 9.1 22 18 164
High-Density R-4-SP 9.8 02 24 19
-Neighborhood Commercial 3.1 0.8
Low-densitv housing allowance C-N-SP 1.0 0.3 7 7
Medium-density housing allowance C-N-SP 2.1 0.5 12, 24
Special Use C-N-SP 0.9 0.2
Business Park 68.8 16.6
Low-rise office character(office) O-SP 10.9 2.6 1 unit/lot 28
Single-story limitation C-S-SP 6.1 1.5
Outdoor use area C-S-SP 5.4 1.3
General Business Park C-S-SP 46.6 11.2
Circulation 60.5 14.6
Streets 41.01 11.3
Bike& Pedestrian Paths (Greenways) R-or 0- 13.51 3.3
Total 416.11 100.0 1, 868
^ 1
Margarita Area Specific Play,and Final El - September 28, 2004 Page 5
Neighborhood Commercial (Section 2.5)
The intent of the neighborhood commercial area is twofold. It will provide area for several small-
scale businesses that can provide services to the residential, office, and business park users in the
area, thus reducing automobile trips and providing a physical and activity related focal point for
the neighborhood. Co-locating the neighborhood commercial uses, neighborhood park, and the
primary transit facility for the area should help create the synergy needed to make each of these
uses more successful.
Business Park (Section 2.6)
The Business Park area will include four zoning categories to establish the intended uses and
implement the ALUP restrictions. Low-rise office will provide for small offices with possible
residential unit above for that area immediately adjacent to the residential areas. The intent of the
other business park areas is to provide locations for a more planned, campus-type development of
commercial service or light manufacturing uses. The "outdoor use only" area would be for
parking or other non-structure dependent uses.
Special Use (Section 2.7)
The special use area includes the historic ranch house and a small orchard. Several uses for the
house and grounds would be allowed by the plan with the intent of preserving its historic
character.
Streets and Paths (Chapter 5)
About 60 acres of the area are designated as streets and paths, although the actual area of streets
will increase somewhat as subdivision maps are approved. In keeping with the transit-oriented
nature of the development, the streets will be used for the transit system and bicycles as well as
automobiles and trucks. The specific plan area will .also have an extensive network of Class I
bicycle and pedestrian paths connecting various parts of the neighborhood and other parts of the
City.
Development of the Margarita Area will occur gradually over time with more residential
construction likely in the earlier years and more business park development in the later years. As
the project builds out, it will provide new transit opportunities by linking existing and new streets,
bikeways, open space corridors and parkland.
Damon Garcia Ranch Request
On September 7" the City received a request from a representative of the Damon and Garcia
families for several changes in the draft specific plan and other issues involving annexation and
subdivision of their property. They expressed clear willingness to work with the City to
successfully implement the specific plan. They would like to offer the needed right-of-way for
Prado Road in return for clear access to both South Higuera and Broad Street. Staff has worked
with the family and the western property owners on the proposed draft plan to provide this access
in the very early phases of the development. The proposed schedule, calls for plans and
specifications for full construction of Prado Road and actual construction of the northerly half of
the road within the right-of-way available at the time of first development. It is assumed that the
western property owners will be developing in the first phase and this will provide the Damon and
Garcia families with both the legal and physical access they desire. They could also relocate their
residences under the current plan and may wish to do that before annexation to the City. These
residences could be served by on-site wells and septic systems.
i - �
Margarita Area Specific Plan dnd Final EIR- September 28, 2004 - Page 6
The request for a "predevelopment" subdivision would be consistent with the current draft plan
once the property is annexed. Impact fees are assessed with issuance of building permits. These
fees would not be a requirement of the subdivision, although the current draft plan calls for
dedication of the open space and park areas with the recording of subdivision maps. Staff has
not reviewed the proposed lot design in detail at this time.
The other requests have the potential to raise new issues. While staff `s current assessment is
that the overall goals of the Damon/Garcia family can be attained, the significant proposed
changes in land use and circulation patterns create a major timing problem. The first timing
problem arises from the likely need to return to the Planning Commission for this extensive of a
change to the draft specific plan. In addition, the land uses may work within the confines of the
ALUP "zones", but it is likely that the ALUC will want a plan layout more similar to the layout
in their adopted plan. This new proposal moves the High and Medium High density residential
closer to the runway centerline, which may concern the ALUC. The expanded Special Use area
on the eastern side could also pose a problem.
At this time staff understands that the Damon/Garcia family do not intend to develop the
property themselves and are looking for others to carry out the bulk of the project development.
A solution would be to adopt the Specific Plan with only minor changes, such as recognizing the
"Garcia Equestrian Facility", and amend the location of specific land uses, if appropriate, when a
development proposal comes forward. This will establish a framework for future development
proposals now, but defer amendments to accommodate a specific design to a time when a
specific design is available. Minor street locations are typically approved with subdivision maps
and it is reasonable to assume that the developer will want some changes in the layout of the
actual land uses. Minor changes can be accommodated within the existing plan and more
complex changes would require an amendment at the time the project is designed.
Specific Plan Circulation
The Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP) takes a distinctive approach to circulation by
designing a system that internally and externally integrates the plan area into the rest of the City.
The interrelation of design, circulation and land use was a significant driving force in laying out
residential street patterns, roadway connections, cross sections, modal connectivity and traffic
systems integration. This totally integrated approach has not only resulted in a highly effective
transportation system, but has also allowed for the use of beneficial transportation design
techniques for Transit Oriented Development.
Transit Oriented Development—What is it and why is it used in the MASP
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) attempts to integrate new development into the fabric of
the community without concentrating solely on the automobile. Instead, transit related
infrastructure, including bicycle, pedestrian and mass transit, receive as much focus as roadways
and the automobile. The orientation of the MASP from a residential perspective is to take
advantage of many of the philosophies of the Neo-Traditional residential design movement and
promote walking and bicycling for trip-making purposes. Cul-de-sacs have been minimized and
roadway and pedestrian/bike connections maximized to promote circulation other than by
primary use of the automobile. Is the MASP a perfect TOD? No, unfortunately the limitations
established by the Airport Land Use Commission and existing topography have restricted
somewhat the ability to be more creative in these areas but overall, the neighborhoods will be
distinct from others that have been developed in the City and many of the primary goals of a
TOD have been preserved.
�' tY
Margarita Area Specific Plan and Final EIR- September 28,2004 Page 7
Finally, the MASP area is part of the larger City planning areas and as such, the Plan
incorporates some of the larger City issues. The Prado Road alignment and design reflects prior
Council decisions on the actual alignment of the roadway as it traverses the MASP area and
accesses Broad Street. In addition, the cross section of Prado Road has been revised to
incorporate concerns expressed.by the Airport Land Use Commission and other environmental
issues including addressing some of the public's concern regarding integration with the sports
field complex. Collector streets at the western and eastern ends of the plan area unite Prado
Road, the MASP area and the Airport area via Tank Farm Road to significantly improve access
and"spread" vehicle traffic across all highways in the southern section of the City.
The circulation components of the MASP are briefly described below, including a discussion of
the issues regarding Prado Road, and how the MASP has been developed to focus on all aspects
of circulation system without a sole focus on streets and roads. The MASP strives to establish
itself as an example of how a TOD can be developed that is sustainable, beneficial to the
community, and responsive to its unique local setting.
Neighborhood Street Design
Traffic calming features have been incorporated along sections of local and collector roadways
where street length and traffic volumes may become problematic. The features have been
proposed based upon the City's experience in using similar devices in existing neighborhoods
that share like characteristics. Bulb-outs are provided to allow landscaping closer to the street
and "bulb-ins" are provided for parking for neighborhood residences. This is an alternative to
current City street design standards that have favored attached sidewalks next to the traveled
way and when streets are under-parked, have a propensity to encourage higher vehicle speeds
along neighborhood streets. Other methods such as mini-roundabouts will be used as intersection
traffic control as additional measures to reduce traffic speed and provide more sustainable
neighborhood characteristics.
The plan focuses on integrating proposed land uses with the adjacent circulation system
including neighborhood connectivity for all transportation modes including bicycle and
pedestrian access to the backbone transportation system.
Mass Transit Integration
The MASP focuses on planning for mass transit integration with adjacent land uses at the earliest
stage possible. Transit service has been incorporated into the land use proposals with the intent
to maximize accessibility to adjacent neighborhoods and the creation of a transit hub located
near the neighborhood commercial properties functions as a community activity node. It is
anticipated that bus service will be extended into new areas as phased developments are
completed and Prado Road is connected between Higuera and Broad Street. Prado Road is
anticipated to become a significant east-west "backbone" for the SLO Transit system. With
regards to Council Member Schwartz's interest in seeing proposed bus routes and stops,the Short
Range Transit Plan (2004) contains one possible routing of the SLO Transit System throughout
the MASP area. Alignment of the bus routes will be determined based upon land uses developing
in the MASP and along its periphery at the time bus service is extended. Further integration of
transit into the neighborhoods (on residential streets) is limited due to service frequency
objectives of establishing minimal bus headways of 30-60 minutes for routes that serve the
southern part of the City.
( � n
' 1
Margarita Area Specific Pla,,and Final El -September 28, 2004 Page 8
The recently completed Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) (2004) discusses the limitations of the
existing east-west street system (South Street) if future buses have to be routed to the north of
the planning areas. The SRTP contains one possible future transit route that uses Prado Road and
Santa Fe to connect activity nodes. As the MASP develops SLO Transit will review available
streets and highways to determine the best fit for transit routing, including that section of Prado
Road that borders the Damon-Garcia Sports Field Complex..
Pedestrians and Bicycles—Making in One Step at a Time
Pedestrian and bicycle paths are a significant component of the overall MASP circulation system.
The philosophy of the plan is to connect land uses and people at the personal level and to develop
a circulation infrastructure that makes it as likely that someone will walk or ride a bicycle for their
trip as use their automobile. Pedestrian and bicycle connections run throughout the plan area
including separate bicycle paths, trails and concurrent routes along proposed streets. Connections
to the north, east and west are provided via identified locations that pedestrians can use to avoid
crossing vehicle traffic to or from significant destinations, such as the Damon-Garcia Sportsfield
complex, the proposed neighborhood commercial site/transit hub and the Marigold shopping
center. Significant pedestrian and bicycle connections to the transit routes are also provided
throughout the plan.
Below is the example of the separated bike/pedestrian crossing for Prado Road. An additional
crossing will occur at Orcutt Creek. Figure 12 of the MASP depicts the complete picture of how
the bicycle and pedestrian backbone system will be integrated throughout the MASP area. As
described to Council at previous meetings, staff has spent significant time ensuring that grade
separated pedestrian and bicycle facilities with proposed street infrastructure be designed in an
aesthetic manner with significant thought to community concerns.
...............................
.:WIN
x'
....................
\ C
h EE
MASP Figure 14—Pedestrian Interchange at Damon— Pedestrian Interchange at Damon — Garcia Sports
Garcia Sports Fields Fields
Highways/Prado Road- Resurfacing Past Issues and Decisions
In order to keep this agenda report brief, Council is requested to refer to the Prado Road Binder;
January 2004 (Binder), that contains significant background information and history regarding
the existing Circulation Element, Prado Road issues, and decisions made to date.
As described above, the proposed MASP is a comprehensive "circulation" and land use
document. The objectives of the goals and policies in the plan are to discourage a single mode as
the "only" solution to address plan impacts and integration of infrastructure into the community.
1 - 7
Margarita Area Specific Plat,and Final EIR - September 28, 2004 Page 9
Prado Road is a significant component of that comprehensive package, thus it would be a mistake
to focus only on the vehicle related issues of Prado Road. Prado Road serves a multitude of
purposes for this area including: the east-west future backbone connection for the transit system;
bicycle and pedestrian connections; as a buffer between residential and industrial uses in the
MASP; an east-west alternative relief route to the Broad Street to South Street corridor; and a
significant overall connector between various land uses now and in the future of the City.
The East-West Connection—A Goal for Over 40 Years (revisited several times)
As shown in Section 1 of the Binder, planning for an east-west connection in this area of the City
has a history dating back over forty years. Numerous documents as well as public hearings have
been conducted that have continued to recommend a roadway connection through the Margarita
Area to Broad to connect the existing and future housing on the east side of the City to the
freeway and western commercial areas. As early as 1962, as part of the first General Plan for the
City, the east-west connection was considered critical for tying origin-destination activities
between our residential and commercial areas. In 1984, the Council directed that a full
interchange be built at the freeway someday in the future.
Since 1984, the Council has reconsidered the alignment of Prado Road at least three times. As
part of the 1994 Circulation Element, three alternatives were studied (including a Tank Farm
Road alignment) with the result being a continued connection of Prado in the vicinity of Industrial
Way. In 2000, the Council considered the Industrial Way alignment against the "Northerly'
alignment, (see section 4 of the Binder) as it traversed the boundary of the sports field project.
Then again, in 2001, in response to public request, the Council reviewed the Northerly alignment
against a connection to Tank Farm Road and reconfirmed the Northerly alignment as the
connection of Prado Road to be brought forth in the MASP (Section 3 of the Binder). Although
each option had advantages and disadvantages, the Council affirmed the northerly alignment as
having the most advantageous in terms of land use, circulation and neighborhood impacts (now
and in the future). These considerations are also detailed in the binder and will be summarized by
staff on September 28`h in our presentation and visual simulation.
The environmental impact report for the AASP/MASP considered four separate circulation
systems to determine the best backbone system for highway connections for this area of the City..
Those alternatives, approved by Council, included analyzing connections between Tank Farm
Road and Los Osos Valley Road (Alt 3), a connection of Prado Road to Tank Farm Road (Alt 2),
the Industrial Way alignment (Alt 1) and the Circulation Element (Project). All alternatives had
impacts as well as benefits to adjacent land uses and future circulation system. Because of the
need to proceed with the sports field design, the traffic portion of the draft EIR was extracted and
used to help determine the alignment in early 2000.
With the two Council decisions of 2000 and 2001, processing the MASP occurred based upon the
direction given by Council to use the northerly Prado Road alignment. The Planning Commission
noted during their review of the MASP that the Council has decided the alignment issue and that
it would not be productive to reconsider it. As part of completing the final MASP draft, staff has
spent considerable time reviewing concerns raised by the public and where able, have
incorporated modifications to the plan that further integrate Prado Road with the adjacent land
uses. Staff has also responded in writing on several occasions to the incorrect assertions that
environmental study of the road alignment has been "segmented" (see binder for letters).
l- q
Margarita Area Specific Plai,dnd Final EIR - September 28, 2004 Page 10
Also contrary to some rumors that have circulated recently, the construction of Prado Road
contains no blasting of adjacent hillsides, tunneling, destruction of archeological resources, or
realignment of Acacia Creek. In fact, the conceptual alignment of Prado Road has been altered to
minimize impacts to wetland areas within the MASP, reduce impacts to western properties (by
utilizing existing roadway alignments across the Unocal and Martinelli properties), and has been
further separated from the archeological site per recommendations of the consulting archaeologist
on the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields project. These modifications were made in accordance with
mitigation measures established by the Council as part of the February 2000 general plan
amendment decision. Similarly, roadway design and construction will be completed to ensure
appropriate level of safety for users of the Damon-Garcia complex, residents of the future MASP
area and the public in general along all roadways, and not just Prado Road.
Unocal and Santa Fe Collectors
The MASP and AASP include integration of traffic between Prado Road and Tank Farm Road via
a western (Unocal Collector) collector and eastern (Santa Fe Road) collector road that will allow
traffic to "spread" across the southern portion of the City. For those concerned with substantial
truck traffic near the Damon-Garcia fields, the extension and connection of Santa Fe Road to
Prado will allow truck traffic from the Airport area to bypass the sports field area. These
collectors also serve a dual purpose. Because Prado Road is to be implemented in phases, these
roadway connections will help in deferring ultimate widening of Prado Road (four lanes) until it's
absolutely necessary in the future.
Phasing of Prado Road
Much discussion has been undertaken on how to phase the construction of Prado Road. The draft
MASP discusses phased implementation of Prado Road from a west to east perspective because
until recently, it was only the western property owners that were ready and willing to develop and
because sufficient right-of-way (ROW) would not be available for a complete connection.
However, recent discussions with the eastern area MASP property owner has indicated that ROW
for most, if not all, of Prado Road may be dedicated up front prior to development of the eastern
properties. If this is the case, making the Prado Road connection can occur much sooner than
anticipated.
The MASP proposes to establish this connection by initially building only two lanes of traffic
(with turn lanes) so as not to overbuild the roadway before demand requires it. It was initially
anticipated that these lanes would be constructed on the north side of Prado Road. As
development occurs, the south side of the road would be constructed. With the potential to have
all ROW acquired initially, there is the potential to develop the initial two lane facility of Prado
Road centered on the future roadway. This would allow for construction and planning of the
median in order to allow the landscaping to mature sooner rather than later. Discussion with area
property owners will continue on this issue in order to develop the most appropriate interim
facility to be constructed as part of initial development phases of the MASP.
Finally, in regard to timing of Prado Road, the current purchase agreement with the Garcia family
for the sports field property allows for vehicular/truck access to Broad Street across the sports
field site until such time as Prado Road is connected or some other access point is acquired by the
City. While the sports field complex has been designed to minimize these vehicle person conflicts,
it is the objective of the City to establish this connection as soon as possible and remove these
private vehicles from the sports field complex.
Margarita Area Specific Play,-.nd Final EIR - September 28, 2004 _ Page 11
Sustainability. Roundabout Traffic Control
A significant proposal in the MASP is the use of round-a-bout traffic control along Prado Road.
Under the appropriate circumstances, roundabouts have a carrying capacity that far exceeds
traffic signal control at conventional intersections. This in turn reduces stop-and-go traffic and
vehicle emissions. As part of MASP development, staff has researched this issue extensively and
believes that using round-a-bout control at the collector intersections along Prado Road will be
highly successful.
r
L fb'
kApv
I 7
/
u �
/
y�
Single Lane Roundabout Multi Lane Roundabout
Environmental Impact Report Certification (future meeting)
The question has been asked, can the City Council certify the EIR for the MASP without first
reviewing the Airport Area Specific Plan?
This question has beenraised by a Council member and the answer is "yes." The California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the City consider the environmental impacts of a
project before making a decision that could have a substantial adverse effect on the environment.
In most cases the project being considered is exactly the same as the project description of the
EIR. In this case, the project evaluated by the EIR goes beyond the Margarita Area and includes
facilities master plans and the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). At a minimum, an EIR project
description must extend to the entire activity that will ultimately result from the Council's action.
The project description must also include reasonably foreseeable future activities that are
consequences of the specific project the Council could approve. The pending AASP falls into the
category of a foreseeable activity. Annexation and subsequent development of the Margarita Area
willfacilitate the annexation and development of much of the Airport Area; however the "project"
being acted upon is the Margarita Area Specific Plan. At this point in time, the Council should
consider the EIR's discussion of AASP impacts as they relate to adopting the Margarita Area
Specific Plan. For example, the realignment of Santa Fe Road to allow traffic to flow smoothly
into and out of the Margarita Area is one of the AASP project features described in the EIR.
A separate environmental determination must be made at the time the Council adopts the Airport
Area Specific Plan. At that time the AASP will be the "project" being acted upon. The current
EIR evaluates the Airport Area Specific Plan in sufficient detail to be used for the adoption of that
plan in the future, although some revisions are likely as the plan is reviewed. Subsequent review
and discussion of the AASP will be accompanied by a detailed review of how the EIR addresses
Margarita Area Specific Pla,.. nd Final EIR September 28, 2004 Page 12
the potential impacts of that plan. Revisions to, and the environmental analysis of, that plan will
take place as appropriate. Depending upon the scope of any revisions, it may be necessary to
recirculate the environmental analysis for public review prior to adopting the Airport Area
Specific Plan. At this time, however, the EIR should be used to determine the foreseeable
impacts of adopting the Margarita Area Specific Plan.
Planning Commission's Action
On June 9th, after eight hearings, additional public testimony, and reaching consensus on about a
dozen minor changes, the Commission voted 5-0 to recommend the City Council certify the EIR,
adopt the specific plan, amend the Land Use Element to reflect the specific plan map, and amend
the zoning for those properties currently within the City. Council approval will also establish
prezoning for those properties not yet in the City but intended to be annexed. The Planning
Commission decision encompassed the topics of land use and circulation, which are the topics of
this report.
Further Council Review
If the Council agrees that many land use and circulation issues remain after the September 28
meeting, two hours have been reserved on the October 5 agenda for a continued hearing, although
no additional agenda report would be anticipated for additional discussion on the subject of this
report. However, if most of the land use and circulation issues have been covered at the
September 28 meeting, Council should continue the hearing to the October 12 special meeting to
begin consideration of Airport compatibility, Public Services & Financing, and plan
implementation. Staff hopes that the plan can be prepared for final adoption following the.
October 12`h meeting.
CONCURRENCES
The various departments of the City have been involved in the development of the specific plan
and the hearing process. The Utilities Department developed the location for public water and
wastewater infrastructure, information on the availability of these services, as well as how to
provide for use of reclaimed water within the specific plan area. The Public Works Department
provided virtually all the information on circulation infrastructure and stormwater facilities.
Police and Fire have reviewed the plan for consistency with the General Plan as it relates to their
services and concur that it is within the level of impacts that had been predicted. All of the above
departments assisted the Finance and Information Technology Department in developing the
Public Facilities Financing section.
In addition to the City departments, the Airport Land Use Commission agreed to include the draft
Margarita Area Specific Plan directly into their Airport Land Use Plan so that it will be reviewed
against the unique standards that apply to this area. Project property owners have also provided
substantial input throughout the process, although their interests and level of agreement with the
plan may differ.
Citizens have been notified of the anticipated discussion of Prado Road on September 28th,
including residents of the Tank Farm Road area (who previously asked to be notified).
t - � a
Margarita Area Specific Plai. .nd Final El - September 28, 2004 Page 13
FISCAL IMPACT
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found
that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Adoption of this specific plan will not
significantly atter revenues since it conforms to the adopted General Plan. To the extent that the
housing component of the Specific Plan is somewhat smaller than proposed in the General Plan
and housing is generally assumed to be a net fiscal liability for City revenues, this plan may have
less fiscal impact than anticipated.
ALTERNATIVES
Because no final action is being proposed for this meeting, no alternative actions are being
suggested.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Margarita Area Specific Plan—Overall Map
3. Margarita Area EIR vs. Specific Plan—Land Use Area Comparison
4. Jones & Stokes June 2, 2004 Letter on Changes to the Specific Plan
5. Draft MASP Circulation Plan
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
A. Final Program Environment Impact Report
B. Prado Road Binder
C. August 2004 Draft Margarita Area Specific Plan—A Transit-Oriented Development
D. Planning Commission Agenda Reports
E. Urban Land Institute's "Successful Development Around Transit"
F. Local Government Commission's "Creating Great Neighborhoods: Density in Your
Community"
G. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan (Previously transmitted)
H. Copy of Short Range Transit Plan
L.'Specific P1ansVV1ASPCAR9-28-04[bl.doc
1- 13
Attachment 1
Bishop Peak �
i
Santa Lucia Foothills
San Luis Mountain
UT
Laguna Lake
ORCU
oma^ a q�
Irish Hills f
TANK FA
................. Airport .....
' :0
•• i
Urban Reserve Line
0.5 0 0.5 Miles
0.5 0 0.5 Kilometers
Vicinity Map N
� t�
LL
LO
Moir.
�ul�bt3'Xl'�
i .. i I
li
li
.,
c gill
0 21
,.00 10 cc 0
.•CL 0
!M.
0 - filings,
T�
dEABAABAAB�ABEAe3./I ,� �kr.n��cy
Attachment 3
Mar arita Area EIR vs. Specific Plan - Land Use Area Comparison
EIR Table 2-2 MASP Table I
Land Use Acres Acres %
Open Space 169 1862 44.8
Hills 146.3 35.2
Greens ace 17.2 4.1
Creek Corridors 22.7 5.5
Parks 55.7 25.9 6.0
Neighborhood Park 9.9 2.4
Sports Fields 16.0 3.6
Residential 74.9 70.7 17.0
Low Density 20.6 5.0
Medium Density-Attached or Detached 35.0 8.4
Medium Density-Detached Only 5.2 1.3
Medium High Density 9.1 2.2
High-Density 0.8 0.2
Neighborhood Commercial 2.1 3.1 0.8
Low-density housing allowance 1.0 0.3
Medium-density housing allowance 2.1 0.5
Special Use 0.9 0.2
Business Park 68.8 68.8 16.6
Low-rise office character office 10.9 2.6
Single-story limitation 6.1 1.5
Outdoor use area 5.4 1.3
General Business Park 46.6 11.2
Circulation 60.5 14.6
Streets 47 47.0 11.3
Bike& Pedestrian Paths (Greenways) 13.51 3.3
Total 418.5 416.1 100.0
LASpecific Plans\MASP\EIR vs MASP.doc
Attachment
Jones & Stokes
June 2,2004
Mr.Mike Draze
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Subject:Changes on the Final.Program EIR for the Margarita Area Specific Plan and Related
Facilities Master Plans
Dear Mike:
As you have indicated to me,the City is making minor changes to the proposed Prado Road extension
location shown in the land use and circulation diagram for the proposed project in the draft program
environmental impact report(EIR) for the Margarita Area Specific Plan EIR(dated September 2003). The
proposed chive would realign the western end of Prado Road and part of the Unocal collector(a north-
south trending road at the western end) to more closely follow the existing property lines than what is
currently shown in the draft EIR The following is our professional opinion based on our understanding of
the project,but should not be considered to be legal advice or a legal opinion.
Jones&Stokes has reviewed the draft EIR is light of the City's proposed changes and,based on our review,
the proposed changes would not introduce a new significant impact,substantially increase the severity of any
impacts previously identified in the draft EIR,or require additional mitigation measures. Pursuant to Section
15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines,in considering the record as a whole,there is no substantial evidence
that the changes will cause significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in previously
identified significant effects of the project Therefore,the impact analysis in the draft program EIR
adequately addresses impacts and the EIR would not need to be recirculated on this issue.
If you have questions about these responses,please call me.
Sincerely,
Maggie Townley
Project Manager
cc John Shoals
2600 V Street • Sacramento,CA 95818-1914 tel. 916 737.3000 fax 916 737.3030
www.ionesandstokes.com
r I
Attachment 5
V) CD
Cn
0 CD
9 r 0
E
0
CD
cc
............
0
OD
CD
7
Q
4N.
*@Ofl
o
tom 3 0 0 0
CI.
QD rv.
-j ED
CL
CL 0 0)
C) 0
0
ED
>
Pt
at CO)
T
CD
'Z
CD
nmv nL-F-
id�1CT�fJflt l LFbOu�1J
MEETING AGENDA jJouuaL ccDD DiREiNNONIC
QiTE IR
ITEM #moi_ FIN C
I CACAO ;Q-FIRE CHIEF
P ATTORNEY ,Z RW DIR �S O
��00 �,Z CLERK/ORIG G POLICE CHF
f L_j DEPT HE4DS - -REO-DIP4_6
��—
Ln hL
� P
Aa_QAL4j_CA_
�ObLbCj
KC
QIndu lel
M, -
AW fuW -_moot I&M 1m_m _u�
---- - -tl — �?_ -Dial-
Al_ �locicm� _Rdtoo_UnPt�cP_
_umlLb-
Carving up the Margarita area
The newest plan for San Luis Obispo's Margarita area includes 868 homes,a business park,a neighborhood commercial — — -
development and parks and open space.
ElOpen space
Neighborhood park,greenways p n
E]Sports fields
snD-
_ Low-density residential
Marga Ave _, (2 Medium-density residential
�CS Medium/high-density residential
�adoRd -�� i �
High-density residential
���
•+ ��° 1a` a Neighborhood commercialX Mali
1c }
Center ®Business park IY CO�JCI
--- - N o��' Feet 2,600 •sa - — 0 Preserved farmhouse - — — —
Tank Farm Rd, 47 (0$�p!)IGF - -- -
_ future Prado Rd.extension
TRIBUNE MAP BY JOE TARICd�, '
�k
�IIII IIIIIIII IIII ( ACAO 2 =IRE CHIEF
ZCATTORNEY ,2,Pw DIR RECEIVED
I CLERK/ORIG 2 POLICE CHF
DEPT HEADS . , REC DIR SEP 2 8 2004
,2_ _ fUiILDIR
MEMORANDUM 1;;, . ;/HR DIH _.. SLID CITY CLERK
From the Office of the City Attorney
September 28, 2004
RED FILE
To: Mayor and City Council - MEETING AGENDA
# (
From: Jonathan P. Lowell, City Attorney DATE ITEM
Councilmember Mulholland raised a concern over certifying a Final EIR covering both the
Margarita Area and Airport Area Specific Plans (MASP and AASP, respectively) when the
Council is only considering the MASP at this point in time.
As explained in the staff report, the Final EIR covers both the MASP and the AASP because the
two areas are linked geographically. Also, when the Planning Commission and Council consider
the AASP in the future, further environmental review will be required under CEQA.
In looking at CEQA and the CEQA guidelines, and specifically Guidelines Section 15168, a
"program EIR" is encouraged when evaluating: activities that are linked geographically,
activities that are logical parts of a chain of contemplated events, or plans that govern the
conduct of a continuing program. The Final EIR the Council is now looking at for the MASP is
a program EIR since it was prepared for series of actions that can be characterized as one large
project, i.e. the MASP, the AASP and related Facilities Master Plans. Program EIRs generally
analyze broad environmental effects of a program with acknowledgment that site-specific
environmental review may be required for particular aspects of portions of the program when
those aspects are proposed for implementation.
The Final EIR is being reviewed while the Council considers the MASP; the staff reports do not
address the AASP in much detail. However, a public review draft of the AASP has been in
circulation since January 2002. I have provided Councilmember Mulholland a copy of this
document, and have directed the City Clerk to place a copy in the Council reading file for the
entire Council to review. With this additional document, the "missing link"between the AASP
and the Final EIR has been provided. This, coupled with the fact that additional environmental
review will be triggered when the AASP is eventually brought forward, should make the Council
comfortable in making a decision to certify the Final EIR. (Remember, additional meetings are
slated for October 5 and 12 regarding this Final EIR, thus there is time to study the public review
draft of the AASP before moving ahead with a decision on certification.)
I hope this information is helpful. Please contact me should you have any further questions.
cc: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Officer
Audrey Hooper, City Clerk
John Mandeville, Community Development Director
Mike Draze, Deputy Community Development Director
11 Julie O'Connor-Margarita Plan �., _ _ �. Page 1
M
From: Agatha Reardon <agatha@fix.net> RECEIVED
To: <MDraze@slocity.org>, <dromero@romeroformayor.com>
Date: 9/28/04 8:35AM SEP ?. 8 2004
Subject: Margarita Plan SLO CITY CLERK
Hello Mike,
Thank you for your notice of public hearing on the Margarita Specific
Plan. I will not be able to attend tonight's City Council meeting, and
have not thoroughly reviewed the data on the subject. One thing I am
concerned about is the possibility of Tank Farm Road as an alternative
route. I have noticed especially in the last few years the tremendous
increase in traffic on Tank Farm Road. With all the new development
going in it will be even worse. I do not believe this is a viable
alternative.
Also, there is mention of some type of collector road between Prado and
Tank Farm. I believe that would also put a great burden on traffic on
Tank Farm Road.
Thanks, again.
Agatha Reardon
1275 Manzanita Way,
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RED FILE
ME TIIN�GjAGENDA
40c _ DATE4 TEM #-'14(COUNCIL TCDD DIR
(CAO ZFIN DIR
ICAO rZ FIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY 7_ PW DIR
CLERKOF.IG c POLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS R E C DIR
UTIL DIR
� RECEIVED
counal mcmopanbum SSP ��:
CLERK
DATE: September 27, 2004 RED FILE /�wuriaL CDD DIR
AGENDA /cAo FIN.DIR
M IN i
TO: City Council �� t A .0 FIRE CHIE
1 =:T ITE #�1 �' t ATTOTTO RNEY e PW DIR
VIA: Ken Hampian, CAO dl'f t CLERK ORIG Z— POUOE Ch
"'VVV ❑ D
UPI HEADS ;1REC DIR
ru Xi UTIL DIR
—
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direct r lClu _ . _ ;,HR DIR
BY: Michael Draze, Deputy Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Proposed Approach to the September 28, 2004, Public Hearing on the Draft
Margarita Area Specific Plan
At the September 7`s City Council meeting, the Council received an overview of the Draft
Specific Plan and it's environmental impact report. The Council endorsed a CAO
recommendation regarding future hearing dates and topics to complete the Council's review of
the Draft Margarita Area Specific Plan. According to this Council direction, staff will make a
presentation on land use and circulation issues on Tuesday night. There are four key objectives
for the meeting:
1. To present the land use and circulation information;
2. To answer the Council's questions:
3. To receive public input; and
4. To receive direction from the Council regarding land use; circulation, and environmental
impact mitigation (including a confirmation on the Prado Road alignment).
In order to achieve these objectives as efficiently as possible, staff proposes the following
sequence for Tuesday night's meeting:
1. Staff presentation on the Draft Specific Plan land use distribution — Where uses will be
located and how they relate to each other.
2. Council questions on the land use distribution.
3. Staff presentation on the circulation component of the Draft Specific Plan — This will
show how the various forms of circulation interconnect throughout the plan area, and as
importantly, how they connect with the rest of the community and how they tie the land
uses together. Toward the end of this discussion will be the computer simulation of the
eastern end of the proposed Prado Road alignment.
4. Council questions on the circulation plan.
5. Public testimony on the Draft Specific Plan, including testimony on the environmental
impact report.
6. Council direction on the two major.topics presented — Do the land use and circulation
proposals adequately achieve the General Plan objectives for the Margarita Area? Does
the proposed Prado Road alignment remain acceptable? Are there any impacts or
mitigation measures regarding land use or circulation that should be changed in the final
environmental impact report?
Continuing The Hearing:
a) If the Council does not complete items 1-6 above, the CAO recommendation is to
continue the hearing to the October 5d`regular meeting
b) If the Council can finish the 6 items above, the CAO recommendation will be to continue
the hearing to the October 12`h special meeting. At that meeting the Council will review
the public services plan, public facilities financing, and other specific plan
implementation programs.
LASpecific Plans\MASP\CC Memo for 9-28-04.doe
1
council MCMORAnoum
Icity or san Luis ows o, admmistkation cue aatment
DATE: September 24, 2004
TO: City Council RED FILE
FROM: Ken Hampian, CAO MIEETIN AGENDA
D:a T E 9/a ITEM #W/
SUBJECT: Sufficiency of Damon-Garcia Field Sizes
The design and layout of the Damon-Garcia fields was established through a high level of
collaboration with sports organization officials. However, several individuals have testified
before Council asserting that the fields are inadequate is size for tournament play and other
purposes. These concerns have mostly been expressed by opponents of the proposed Prado Road
alignment. However, more recently soccer officials have expressed similar concerns based on
information provided by alignment opponents.
The first such official, the Cal Poly women's soccer coach, testified last summer, and based on
his belief that the fields were insufficient for tournament play, the attached letter was sent in
early July to several sports organizations in the community for clarification and "rumor control"
(and copied to Council). Based on this letter and further discussions with staff, the coach is now
enthusiastically working with staff to schedule a tournament when the fields are open next year.
Last Tuesday night, another soccer official, a referee, expressed concerns about field size. Staff
talked to this official following his testimony, and left a phone message on Wednesday alerting
him that a letter of clarification was on the way.
Because testimony is likely to be made next Tuesday regarding the size of the Damon-Garcia
sports fields, I thought it would be helpful to provide Council with another copy of the letter for
reference, which is attached. Staff will bring copies of this letter to the September 28°i Council
meeting in order to provide the information to any individuals new to this concern.
In the meantime, if Council members have any questions, please feel free to contact Parks and
Recreation Director Paul LeSage or myself.
Attachment: July 2004 Field Size Clarification Letter
it Pi�lc�
I COUNCIL CDp Di-
CAO L7- FIN DIR
ACAO 4 FIRE CHIEF
N ATTORNEY 01 PW DIR
C1 _R 11, POLICE CHF
DEPT 1EADS REC DIR
/Y6 UTIL DiR
Q.. FiP
Damon G Field Size Redfle
City Of sail WIS OBISp0
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT•1341 Nipomo Street • San Luis Obispo.CA 93401
July 2004
To: San Luis Obispo Sports Organization Representatives
Re: Damon-Garcia Sports Fields
It is my understanding that several individuals in the community have commented at recent City
Council meetings about the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields. They have stated that due to the
alignment of Prado Road along the northern side of the sports fields, the site is too small and
does not contain fields that could be used for major soccer competitions. This is not quite
accurate. .
First, it is important to remember that the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields were developed with a
significant amount of input from the sports community. While any turf sport can be played at the
complex the major use will be for soccer. Representatives from local soccer groups reviewed
and approved the design. Damon-Garcia is essentially two large lawns, giving the complex a lot
of flexibility in how it can be used.
The attached map shows the complex set up with four soccer fields. With smaller fields, such as
is used in AYSO soccer as many as 11 fields can be accommodated. In the four field alignment,
the three fields east of Acacia Creek are shown as being 100yards by 60 yards. This meets the
FIFA standard for a regulation field. The minimum size is 100 yards by 50 yards. The field on
the west side of Acacia Creek is 125 yards by 75 yards. This more than meets the FIFA
minimum standard for"international competition", which is 110 yards by 70 yards.
The space for fields on the east side of Acacia Creek is not affected by Prado Road. This space
is constrained by Acacia Creek, Broad Street, and Orcutt Creek. With or without Prado Road,
there is not any additional land in this area of the complex.
While the east fields are shown as 100 yards by 60 yards, the fields have a 20 foot buffer on all
sides. This allows for the movement of the fields to protect the grass. Obviously, if the goals are
left in one place the grass in those areas will quickly wear out. For major soccer competitions,
the fields can be expanded. Three international sized fields of 110 yards by 70 could be
squeezed in. If the full international size of 120 yards by 75 was needed, two could easily be
accommodated. With the field west of Acacia Creek, that is three international sized fields. For a
tournament that started Friday night and went until 6pm on Sunday, 45 regulation matches could
be scheduled.
With or without Prado Road, no additional fields could have been added on the west side of
Acacia Creek. There is less than 1.5 acres of land that is useable for fields. It is long, 175 yards,
and narrow, 35 yards. A regulation soccer field would not fit in that space.
C
It is anticipated that the fields will be open next spring. Before that time, Parks and recreation
Department staff will conduct a stakeholders meeting to divide up the use of the fields. Staff will
make a serious attempt to accommodate any major competitions, tournaments, or significant
events that could take place at the fields. Staff is also available to assist in facilitating these
events, as needed.
As Parks and Recreation Director, I am always available to respond to the type of questions that
were presented to the Council regarding the Damon-Garcia sports fields. Ultimately any
questions raised will be referred to me for a response. Ether way, the questions will be answered
in a timely manner, but if you come to me first they can be answered faster.
Yours Truly,
Paul LeSage, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
City of San Luis Obispo
SSRE � � � '' � 1
�_... ON // • 7/
cc
wa
VI
1 ti
tF
,.
� z
ao =
ti$�
a.
� LL �i , � :WZ U __
� m ILI
®i 9 04ZJ p $
O ''q ;
w o. tlt 1�' �a g I
Z ! � w �2 0d ,.;
O 0i �� o� oca
0 U p
J
lu
f ill illi IL Rl
...
Julie O'Connor- Margarita Area , „ Page 1
From: "D. & E. Dollar" <ddollar@pacbell.net>
To: Mike Draze <mdraze@slocity.org>, Neil Havlik<nhavlik@slocity.org>
Date: 9/16/04 10:21 AM
Subject: Margarita Area �-
RECEIVED
Mike and Neil,
FI 1��
, l
I think it would be desirable and meet various city Land Use Elements to
have a viable wildlife corridor connecting the northern and northwest SLO CITY CLERK
parts of the proposed open space with the southern greenway. Near the
center of the planning area, there is a planned neighborhood park. I
suggest that a viable wildlife corridor, similar to that for Acacia
Creek, be put through that park area to connect with the areas to the
north and south. I understand that the developers have recently
submitted some requested changes, but I am unaware of what those
requested changes are and if they involve this area.
Please feel free to contact me on this.
Thank you,
Don Dollar
781.0118
j^CO NCIL %'CDD DIR
� CAO —2 N DIR
,t�ACAO /a'FIRE CHIEF
le�ATTORNEY e2�wDIR
RED FILE ,%1 CLERK/ORIG !POLICE CHF
1:1D PT HEAD E'REC DIR
ME ING AGENDAf�IO'-n'uT1 DIR
i
To City of San Luis Obispo fr, Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing o. 8/2004-
regarding
/2004-regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review R E 11
O 9-28-2004 PIED FILE SEP 2 8 2004
�.ASETING AGENDA
To: City of San Luis ObispoL,,, i c TEPA SLO CITY CLERK
From: Michael Sullivan, 1127 Seaward St., San.Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 545-9614
on behalf of Citizens for Planning Responsibly("CPR"), P:O. Box 1145, San Luis Obispo, CA
93405 President: Eugene Jud, (805) 545=5919/756-1729
RE: City Council hearing 9/28/2004- Agenda item Public Hearing 1 - Draft Margarita Area
Specific Plan and Final Program Environmental Impact Report(State Clearing House number
2000051062-Final Program Environmental Impact Report-Airport Area and Margarita Area
Specific Plans and Related Facilities Master Plans, Volumes I and IL published 9/2003)
Glossary of abbreviations/acronyms
AASP-Airport Area Specific Plan
CEQA-California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code,Sec..21000 et sec)
CEQA GL-CEQA Guidelines(Code of Regulations,Title 14,Sec.15000 et seq)
GL-Guidelines(of CEQA)
EIR-Environmental Impact Report -
FPEIR-Final Program Environmental Impact Report
MASP-Margarita Area Specific Plan / ,0 F I,; DIP
LOVR-Los OsosValley Road /,CAO �FIRECHIEF
REF-Reference. !-?5 ,tkTTORNEY -R-P`>' DIF,
SLO-San Luis Obispo CLERK;ORIG rZ POLICE CHF
11-1 DEPT HEADS
To members of City Council: I L^AndcA�IL� '
Comments below augment or reinforce concerns expressed by me and/or other persons earlier
during the City's review of the project. I am a member of the citizens'group called Citizens for
Planning Responsibly(CPR). I present these concerns both as an individual and as a representative
of CPR.
The certification of a legally inadequate EIR is a prejudicial abuse of discretion. (Public
Resources Code 21005; Citizens to Preserve the Ojai v. County of Ventura(2nd Dist. 1985) 176 .
Cal App 3d421, 428 (222 Cal Rptr247)). (REF Remy(1999),p. 319 etc.). The Final Program EIR
(and the MASP) are legally inadequate for various reasons, some of which are explained below.
—lam ity conud eM-use-a "piecemeal"-or-seginen-ted approacli tot et-environmental
analysis of Prado Road.
The City has attempted to refute claims of various persons (See, for example, ATT. J,letter
from Michael Sullivan)that the environmental review of Prado Road has been segmented. (See for
example Attachment B at p. 2060 through 2064, letter of 16 Jan 2004 from Ken Hampian to Mila
O Vujnovich-LaBarre.). Mr. Hampian's letter suggests that a comprehensive and up-to-date
environmental review for the Prado Road corridor(which extends from Madonna Road to U.S. 101
to Higuera Street to Broad Street)has been satisfied by various previous environmental studies (See
Table 01,below.) However,these studies reflect older conditions or assumptions (e.g. land use)
which.have subsequently changed, or they rely on old data(e.g. traffic assumptions and projections
•
To Cityof San Luis Obispo fi_ .Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing ox-,28/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 2 of 11 '
from 1994)which must be brought up to date to allow a meaningful analysis. The various
environmental.studies mentioned in Mr. Hampian's letter do not add up to a useful, comprehensive,
up-to-date analysis. The various environmental studies (1994 to 2001; See Table 01,below)have
been disjointed in time, in geographic location, and in the focus of study. Compounding the
"segmentation" even further,the City recently(20 Apr 2004 Council hearing)decided to
recommend additional environmental review for the Prado Road Bridge at San Luis Creek; and Cal
Trans has recently noted that they will do their own independent environmental analysis for the
proposed Prado/US 101 interchange.
Mr. Hampian's letter states, "Thus far,the project description for the Prado Road alignment and
the interchange has not changed significantly since 2000." This is false. For example,the Jan 2000
Initial Study for the northern alignment(ATT. J)at p. 6 states, "The proposed alignment would also
extend through mostly undeveloped grazing land in the Margarita Area." Yet the MASP envisions
various urban uses in close proximity to Prado Road,not "undeveloped grazing land." The land use
pattern in some of the older environmental studies was significantly different from the land use
pattern proposed currently. Obviously,the potential impacts (e.g. noise, air pollution,visual, etc)
from the road would be more severe in an urban context than.for surrounding land that is
undeveloped.
Prado Road is to be a public road,designated on the Circulation Element of the General Plan
(Figure 2, Jan. 2001 update of 1994 Circulation Element) as a highway/regional route, and as a
truck route(See MASP FPEIR 9/2003,Fig. 3D-7). and as a potential route for Highway 227. The
City has been considering Prado Road as a future route for State Highway 227. (See MASP FPEIR
9/2003 at p. 313-16, "Prado Road Project Study Report." Such a public highway requires
environmental review at the earliest feasible stages. This environmental review for the Prado Road
public highway project must be completed as early as feasible in the planning process. CEQA GL
15004(b). (See discussion, ATT. I at p..3 of 4, letter from M. Sullivan to City, 07 May 2004).
Instead,the City has chosen to use a segmented approach, dividing the environmental analysis into
separate geographic areas and separate times, as shown in Table 01,below.
Table 01 also shows that various project assumptions for the segmented analyses are not
consistent with the current(9/2004) Margarita Area Specific Plan (MASP). Therefore, a
supplemental EER is required by CEQA to bring the analysis up to date to provide meaningful,
useful information and analysis. The supplemental EIR should address the impacts and
consequences for Prado Road along its entire length from Madonna Road to Broad Street.
A supplemental EIR for the entire length of Prado Road(from Madonna Road to Broad Street) is
necessary to update and coordinate the myriad segmented analyses that have been done so far and
which are anticipated within the near future(e.g. the proposed Cal Trans study of US I01/Prado
interchange, and the City's study for the Prado/ San Luis Creek bridge) and to present the Prado
Road planning issues in a broader regional context.
CEQA requires a supplemental EIR when conditions have changed significantly and/or when
new significant information becomes available. In the case of Prado Road, significant changes have
occurred with respect to land use(compared to earlier environmental studies from 1994 to 2000)
and with respect to the amount of development in existence and the amount of traffic. This new
information is necessary to adequately assess the environmental consequences and to present a
reasonable range of alternatives for the Prado Road corridor.
i �
To City of San Luis Obispo frL, .Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of .8/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 3 Of I 1
O
In some cases, the older environmental traffic data is woefully outdated. For example,the 1994
data used for the Circulation/Land Use elements update EIR is now more than 10 years old,yet the
City claims that the 1994 EIR is an important part of the Prado Road environmental analysis.
In addition, the MASP environmental analysis fails to provide a true regional analysis for traffic
infrastructure planning. For example,the traffic analysis (MASP FPEIR 9/2003)gives no
projections for traffic impacts on certain street links and key intersections such as Tank Farm Rd. at
Unocal collector or Tank Farm Rd. at Santa Fe Road.
The MASP FPEIR fails to adequately analyze possible alternative routes for Highway 227. For
example, Buckley Road has been suggested by some persons (e.g. Eugene Jud)as a preferred route
for Highway 227 rather than Prado Road, yet this alternative was not presented in the MASP FPEIR.
Such an alternative routing for Highway 227 could have significant environmental advantages over
the current MASP. For example, negative impacts for noise, air pollution,visual degradation, and
safety would be lessened within the Margarita area. If the Prado Road'Northern Alignment"were
abandoned in favor of a more sensible connection of Prado Road to Tank Farm Road, substantial
environmental damage could be avoided(e.g. archaeological resources,biological resources,noise, .
air pollution,visual resources, etc.) in the portion of the site near the Damon Garcia sports fields
and near the South Hills open space. There could be a more compatible relationship of the sports
fields to the open space,without a busy truck route highway separating those two uses. This
Oalternative should be analyzed within the MASP FPEIR and/or within a supplemental EIR.
The city intends to revise its Circulation Element of the General.Plan in the near future. The
City should use that opportunity to reveal the potential alternatives available for the Margarita Area
and surrounding vicinity of the south part of the city, especially for the area between the South Hills
and Buckley Road and between U.S. 101 and Broad Street. It makes very little sense to view the
Margarita Area Specific Plan's transportation planning within such a limited geographic scope as .
has been done in the MASP FPEIR.
Table 01-Environmental review for Prado Road(Jan 1994 to Sep 2004)
Date Project title Relevant Geograph Are project Are
environ- is area (of assumptions environmental
mental Prado consistent with data
document Road) current (e.g.traffic)
analyzed9/( 2004) up-to-date?
in the Margarita
envir. Area Specific
document Plan?
1994 City of SLO EHL Madonna NO! NO!
Land use element/ Road to (l) Land use (1) Traffic data and
Circulation element Broad Street. surrounding Prado population projections
updates. Road corridor was are at least 10 years old.
assumed tobe open
grazing land,,not
urbanized.
(2) Did not include
potential impacts of
more recent projects
ti
To City of San Luis Obispo fi,. Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of Y28/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 4 Of 11
i I
Date Project title Relevant Geograph Are project Are
environ- is area(of assumptions environmental
mental Prado consistent with data
document Road) current (e.g.traffic)
analyzed (9/2004) up-to-date?
in the Margarita
envir. Area Specific
document Plan?
e.g.Dalidio
Marketplace.
2000/ City of SLO. Mitigated The limited NO! Traffic volumes are
2001 Amendment of Negative area in (1) Land use from Feer and Peers
Circulation element. Declaration. immediate surrounding Prado report of 1999.
(Prado Road Northern vicinity of Road corridor was
AlignmEnt) Northern assumed to be open
Alignment, grazing land,not
near Broad urbanized.
Street.
2001 City of SLO(5/2001). Mitigated The limited NO! Traffic and parking
Damon Garcia Sports Negative arra in (1) Does not include section deals only with
Fields. Declaration immediate analysis of impacts of traffic impacts caused
vicinity of Prado Road on by use of sports.fields.
Northern adjacent land uses as Traffic data is very
Alignment, given in current limited.
near Broad (9/2004)MASP.
StreeL _ __
200Th
3 City of SLO(2003). EER e limited NO! Data were recent when
Dalidio Marketplace. area in (1) Traffic study EIR was published
immediate assumed Prado Road (2003)but Cal Trans
vicinity of to be 2 lanes,rather has recently(2004)
Dalidio site, than 4. suggested that Cal
extending on (2) Traffic study area Trans should do an
Prado Road was limited to a very independent
eastward as small area environmental analysis
far as Higuera surrounding Dalidio for the Prado/US 101
Street. site; did not cover intersection. Also,Cal
Prado Road east of Trans(See ATT.F)
Higuera Strect noted that an alternate
route for Highway 227
(other than Prado Rd)
can be considered by
Calif.Transportation
Commission.
2003 Margarita Area EIR The limited Substantial amount of
Specific Plan area of Prado traffic data is about 8
Road within years old(from 1996/
-the-Margarita. - -1997).
Area Specific
Plan
neighborhood.
4/2004 Prado Road Bridge at Council The limited Unknown. Unknown.
San Luis Creek Agenda report area of Prado
(4/20/04) Road in the
recommended immediate
future vicinity of
environmental San Luis
studies. Creek.
2004 Prado Road!U.S. 101 Calif.Dept.of The limited I Unknown. Unknown.
To City of San Luis Obispo fiti___Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of,_X8/2004- .
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 5 of 11
C Date Project title Relevant Geograph Are project Are
environ- is area(of assumptions environmental
mental Prado consistent with data
document Road) current (e.g.traffic)
analyzed (9/2004) up-to-date?
in the Margarita
envir. Area Specific
document Plan? _
Freeway interchange Transportation area of Prado
(Cal Trans) Road in the
recommends its immediate
own vicinity of the
environmental freeway
study for the interchange.
intersection.
2. Proposed parkland plan is inconsistent with General Plan.
The MASP(see e.g.p. 81)would allow in-lieu fees for off-site parkland dedication in place of at-site park
construction. This violates the Parks and Recreation element of the General Plan.
Policy 1.33.3 Recreation facilities shall be accessible to all individuals,regardless of race,religion,age,
gender,disabilities,and income level.
VIOLATION. With in-lieu fees,recreation facilities would be created(presumably)away from the project
site. Therefore,access is likely to be difficult or impossible for some individuals,such as those without cars.
Policy 1.33.6 New development should contribute to the developmentg of park facilities in proportion to the
demand resulting from increased population.
VIOLATION. With in-lieu fees, sufficient parkland for the local(project)population will not be available.
The reduced acreage of parkland will cause overcrowded use.
3. Various mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring measures described (Planning
Commission staff report,09 Jun 2004,Attachment 4)do not meet CEQA standards for adequacy.
Just a few examples are eiven_ielow in Table 02:
O
To City of San Luis Obispo fit....Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of Y/28/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 6 of 11
Table 02-Deficiencies in environmental analysis and mitigation -
Impacts Claimed impact Actual impact Mitigation Deficiencies in
before mitigation before mitigation measures adopted mitigation
LTS=less than
significant
S=significant but
mitigated
SU=significant,
not completely
miti atable
LU-4 Land use LTS S? None Mitigation is
compatibility Potential land use absent.
incompatibilities,
e.g.Prado Road
northern alignment
is incompatible
with use and
enjoyment of sports
fields and open
space; residential
uses close to Prado
Rd(busy highway)
causing noise,air
pollution, safety
concerns.
13I0-3 Loss or None required S? None Mitigation is
temporary absent.
disturbance of Damon Garcia
serpentine Envir.Review
bunchgrass Technical Reports
grasslands (2001)identified
bunchgrass areas
thorughout the site,
including within
areas to be
developed,such as
near Northern
Alignment of Prado
Road.
13I0-7 .Loss or S S?or SU? 1310 1.1,6.1 The so-called
temporary "mitigation"of BIO
disturbance of 6.1 is to develop a
seasonal wetland mitigation plan!
There is no
reference to
performance
standards. This is
inadequate under
CE A.
de
To City of San Luis Obispo fro_-Achael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of 3/2004-
O regarding Margarita/,Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 7 Of 11
Noise N-1 LTS S? None Mitigation is
Exposure of land Some residential absent.
uses to traffic noise land uses are quite
in excess of close to busy Prado
standards for Road. It is highly
exterior noise likely that noise
exposure impacts wouldbe
significant.
4. The analysis of project alternatives is inadequate under CEQA. A supplemental EIR or EIR
addendum should be prepared to examine the issues below:
(a) Recently(early Sep. 2004),Damon-Garcia property owners have filed a request for significant
amendments of the land use plan. .(See ATT.N).. Such major revisions in the potential land use
should be considered as an alternative to the proposed plan. The Planning Commission should
review this proposal and make recommendations to the Council. It is not fair to the landowners to
simply attempt to dispense with this proposal without even giving it a proper evaluation and
consideration by staff and Planning Commission. The City might answer that the property owners
could simply apply for a Specific Plan amendment later on: 'This is infeasible because a later
O amendment would be costly, and it because the overall plan should be agreed on now,not months or
years in the future. It would be best to.consider this alternative land use plan along with alternative
circulation plans relating to the MASP area as well as for the surrounding area in the south part of
San Luis Obispo. This could be done relatively soon as the City amends its Circulation element.
(b) The alternatives analysis for routes for Highway 227 is inadequate because the MASP FPEIR
does not adequately look at the broader perspective of regional circulation planning in the southern
part of San Luis Obispo. For example,Buckley Road could be considered a prime candidate for a
superior route for Highway 227 since Buckley Road could avoid much of the congestion that exists
along Broad Street,Prado Road, Tank Farm Road, and South Higuera Street, and could provide a
direct link to the LOVR/US 101 interchange, giving an excellent link to 101 southbound and to Los
Osos. Please see ATT. E(incorporated by reference), letter from Eugene Jud(with attachments)for
Council hearing of 07 Sep 2004.
5.-1(t-is-time-for-theme-ity-to-r-e think-its-uniortunate-decisionsoncerning-the-nor-ther-n
alignment of Prado Road. There are numerous reasons why the northern alignment should be
abandoned and the connection of Prado Road to Tank Farm Road should be restored in place of the
northern alignment:
(a) Dave Romero (See ATT..C)has advocated that the City should consider an additional
alternative to the Prado Road extension to Broad Street. This involves a Y intersection as depicted
in ATT. D, option F. This was one of the original concepts from the 1994 Circulation element.
To City of San Luis Obispo h__a Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of xiU'/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 8 Of 11
(b) Elimination of the northern alignment of Prado Road would eliminate many serious
environmental consequences. (Please See ATT. P). Some examples of impacts associated with the
northern alignment;
-noise impacts on residential uses planned for Damon-Garcia portion of site
-noise,safety and air pollution impacts on users of Damon Garcia sports.fields
-disturbance or loss of known archaological sites near the proposed road
- disturbance and/or loss of sensitive serpentine bunchgrass habitat(in the pathway of the road)
- loss of visual qualities adjacent to South Hills open space caused by cut-and-fill grading and the
visual sight of the roadway and traffic, as viewed from Broad Street and from Damon-Garcia sports
fields
-loss of easy connection between recreational use(Damon-Garcia fields) and South Hills open
space
-degradation of the open space experience offered by the South Hills Open Space because of visual
and noise factors and because of the major barrier created between the Sports Fields and the open
space
- degradation of streams, especially Acacia creek
- interference with wildlife migration from South Hills
(c) Potentially at least one additional soccer or other type of sports field could be placed at Damon-
Garcia. (See ATT: O). This additonal space could, alternatively,be used for other kinds of much-
needed sports fields, such as basketball or tennis.
(d) In any case, there will be a need for either a traffic circle or signal light at the intersection of
Santa Fe Road and Tank Farm Road. It would be feasible to create a connection here for joining
Tank Fane Road to Prado Road. For example, see proposals of Michael Sullivan(ATT. H,p. 6 of
6)or of Eugene Jud(ATT. E, diagrams).
6. The MASP remains inconsistent with the City's General Plan in various ways, as outlined
previously by me and others. Some examples are given below.
Table 03 - General Plan inconsistencies (See Council Agenda Report 9.7-04,Attachment 4)
General Plan element/policy Inconsistency of project
LU 2.2.2 -separation and buffering between Certain areas (e.g. eastern residential areas near
residential and non-residential uses Prado Road)have very narrow buffers which
would not effectively shield residences from the
noise and pollution associated with Prado Road.
LU 6.4.1 -Creek and wetland management Prado Road northern alignment is inconsistent
objectives with protection of Acacia creek
LU 6:4.2 -Creating a network of open space, Prado Road northern alignment is incompatible
parks and trails with the connections for pedestrians, cyclists,
and sports field users between the parkland
(Damon Garcia) and the South.Hills open space.
The roadway creates unsafe conditions for
pedestrians and hikers, creates a physical barrier,
and creates negative visual and noise impacts.
To City of San Luis Obispo frL ..Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of 8/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 9 of 11
CI 6.4 -Residential setbacks from streets to Certain areas (e.g. eastern residential areas near
avoid need for sound walls Prado Road) have very narrow buffers which
would not effectively shield residences from the
noise and pollution associated with Prado Road.
CI 15.7 -New development to bear costs of new Under the Dalidio Marketplace plan,the City
transportation facilities would in effect help pay for the US 101/Prado
overpass because of lost sales tax revenue.
Dalidio developers should pay a much larger
share of the cost of the overpass. Instead,the
extra costs are being passed on to MMP
property owners.
OS 8.0 -Historical, archaeological, or cultural Prado Road northern alignment causes
resources should be preserved as open space. significant degradation of known archaeological
resources which are within or in close proximity
to those resources. The sites would not be
clearly "preserved"by having a 4-lane state
highway over them.
Conservation element policies 1.2.2, 1.2.7,4.1.5, Prado Road northern alignment is incompatible
4.1.6, 5.1.6 -Protection of natural resources with protection of Acacia creek, serpentine
bunchgrass habitat,wildlife migration,
endangered plant habitats
I respectfully request that the City should not certify the MASP FPEIR until the deficiencies
listed above are corrected.
Michael C. Sullivan
CC: Jana Zimmer,Attorney at Law, Santa Barbara, CA
REFERENCES
Bass,_R et a1.-(1999). CEQADeskbook—Second_edition,with_20.01_supplement._PointArena,_CA:
Solano Press Books
Curtin, D. et al. (2003). Curtin's California Land Use and Planning Law. 23rd edition. Point Arena,
CA: Solano Press Books.
Remy, M. et al. ((1999). Guide to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). 10th edition.
CPoint Arena, CA: Solano Press Books.
To City of San Luis Obispo fru..1 Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing of 7/28/2004-
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Enviromnental Review Page 10 of 11
ATTACHMENTS ("REF" indicates the documents exist in files of City of SLO and are not
physically attached to this letter but are incorporated by reference.)
A. REF. City of SLO(09 Jun 2004). Planning Commission Staff Report for hearing of 09 Jun
2004. File ER 73-00, SP 73-00. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Margarita
Area Transit-Oriented Specific Plan, the Airport Area Specific Plan and Related Facilities Master
Plans, and adoption of the Draft Margarita Area Transit-Oriented Specific Plan.
B. REF. City of SLO (07 Sep 2004). Council Agenda Report for hearing of 07 Sep 2004. Draft
Margarita Area Specific Plan, Final Program Environmental Impact Report, and Meeting Schedule.
C. City of SLO (Sep 2003). Margarita Area Specific Plan FPEIR at p. 2-54. Comments from
Dave Romero re Prado Road.
D. City of SLO (Aug 1994). FEIR. Land use element/Circulation element updates, at p. 3-26.
Map- Circulation variations of the proposed project.
E. REF. Eugene Jud(06 Sep 2004). Letter to City Council,with attachments. RE: EIR Margarita
and Specific Plan. For Council hearing of 07 Sep 2004. (20 pages total)
F. Calif. Dept. of Transportation.(Cal Trans) (02 Jul 2004). Letter to Eugene Jud RE Southern San
Luis Obispo Area. —
G. City of SLO (28 Jan 2004). Planning Commission staff report for hearing of 28 Jan 2004. Draft
Margarita Area Specific Plan etc. at"Att. 4" named Figure 1 -Major planning documents
discussing Prado Road alignment. (3 pages)
H. Sullivan, M. (09 Jun 2004). Letter from Michael Sullivan to City of SLO for Planning
commission hearing of 09 Jun.2004 for Margarita Area Specific Plan etc. and attachments. (6 pages
total)
I. Sullivan, M. (07 May 2004). Letter from Michael Sullivan to City of SLO (John Mandeville,
Director,Dept of Community Development)re CEQA review of Prado Rd/Highway 227 project
etc. (4 pages total)
J. City of SLO Jan 2000 . Initial Environmental Study: Circulation Element Amendment for
Prado Road Extension. ER 190-99.
K REF. City of SLO (20 Apr 2004). Council Agenda Report,Bus 3. Prado Road Bridge
Widening. See this report's Attachment B,p. 1.
L. City of SLO (21 Jun 2002). Notice of Determination. Damon Garcia Sports Fields. ER 185-99. -
(Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared).
M. REF. City of SLO (2002). Damon Garcia Sports Fields. Master Plan Report. (32 pages total)
To City of San Luis Obispo frc_Michael Sullivan-for City Council hearing o._.Z8/2004-
O regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 11 of 11
N. Damon Garcia Ranch owners(Sep 2004). Letter requesting alteration of land use plan. With
three maps as attachments. (14 pages total).
O. City of SLO (May 2001). Damon Garcia Sports Fields. Environmental Review Technical
Reports. Initial Study/Application# 185-99. Map of Damon Garcia Sports Park.
P. City of SLO (May 2001). Damon Garcia Sports Fields. Environmental Review Technical
Reports. Initial Study/Application# 185-99. Map of Damon Garcia Sports Fields, Fig. 6.
Q. REF. City of SLO (Aug 2004). Margarita Area Specific Plan. A Transit-oriented
Development. Planning Commission draft.
u'_9
.L >L W y E
a = 5o wa P e.=e
o L'
Y. Y w` a�: a
'a
L
*a a 03 L sE?,a YOi g yt... t
-2= C
P5m9 ' e > xE.Sar' jn. Y �� t
a re'�� = eQp� es ye QCp — �L
^G T���a mEaCy 5 �a� � te.$aU
C =
y�V' m
Y E > o V.. , a'4 I S't'. i
ut,A�8tt!! a 1
04 �i' > eavi_ o9 ,
gB
r
J
o
m m L.5r O 9 o =� s ,a`b dP $o_'C2=
� dG YDu �.E 2CL. 8 �
= c.ar m v 6b ao p9g2 a:y�oyp .�i �5; Y
�.e o m 9 u 'C 85 Sa a >9 3 3 G$
�> 2xyumggeorL
6 �'�q903
o SS ry e a.
ems—,
E-
200 mS9 C p
m9.9� .9Cm85s
$a �� gape�Qi al9 < gYG $�' 8g8
=Gp� � aC B g85ue� 5'Q>Q }�j��
r3 C
<m Y C C O O C �Y5, V 4 JC > S Y p S 4 w e > w L w m
■■M��Y��///I < 'o ==�° 32-m ; Sa,'Z
� E :
g
m ', `a in E-r�. ,;
aDa E
7c, SoxyQ g u3 c ' .pe � uv YC > � S -
�^ F � e = a .6 �.F —SO Ca w! Siao.O�._
YTea - m +gv� �3 eEt:s
E // � / /Ti�l yr ♦�.r ; i
B i ���,�rV�r �s�/K \ ••�
i
.♦_ \
WOW
4.0
04
�� ti .��•e•.JX—V• may, \ ,v •� ,� s , r...s♦ w '• r � ••
IL
� � ••'
•J;,r a ?\ .
r
i
`
..............................
_...........................
..�_.�wr.�r........ \ \� •►
/J
vw`taettotr •
' A Hwy 1 Reliever is Rural Flouts H South Street overpass not twat
B Hwy I ReGever connects to LOVR I Osos and Broad freeway ramps dosed
C Santa Rosa widened to 6 teres J Broad Street freeway ramp dosed
D Santa Rosa underpass at Foothil; K Sacramento Drive extended to oram
Murray Intersection dosed L Prado overpass at t5guera Street
I ReGever is 4-lane freeway N o y rsmps
F Pra o s major east-wast routs widened.to 2 lames . .
ti Prado�ir Tank Farm connected
�� toms
:.tso
�uup;Ill � �I��all�li �tY of
CIRCULATION VARIATIONS .
san luis omp0 TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
ta90 Palm sOro.vPost Office Box 6100•Sen Luis Obispo,CA 934"l 00
-1 0r 0 MCQelland 3-26 FIGURE 3.7-1
. `� F 'OR"._
AMID SCHW RZENECTG v or
•APARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MGUERA STREET
LUIS OBLSPO,CA 93401-5415
.TONE (805)549-3111
FAX (805)549-3329
TDD(805)549-3259 FTex}owpower!
httpJ/www.dotgov/dist05 Beenegye ide7 l
July 2,2004 of _ g Zd 4-
Eugene Jud Of
Jud Consultants
P.O:Box 1145
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SOUTHERN SAN LUIS OBISPO�AREA
r;
Dear ud:
I am in receipt of your letter of May 27 suggesting that we meet to discuss the future of
key transportation decisions in the southern San Luis Obispo area. . I have very much
Cappreciated opportunities to be involved in your classroom discussions about smart
growth and contexts solutions related to. transportation. I also appreciate your .
enthusiasm.for bringing .your ideas forward into decisions facing the City of San Luis
Obispo.
I agree that making decisions that integrate land use and transportation needs to be
holistic. Doing so, however, requires an evaluation of the.parts to ensure that the system
works well as a whole. Operation of individual intersections apd interchanges is I as
important as future growth and circulation patterns. It is my hope that outreach efforts
such as the Broad Street charrettea co-hosted the City of San Luis.Obispo (City) and the
Department.of Transportation (Department) can help integrate community vision into
transportation and land use decisions.
The role of the Department in the issues you have raised in your letter is somewhat
varied. I understand that you met with members of my staff on Thursday, June 24 to
discuss your vision for the area in southern San Luis Obispo. As my staff outlined during
the discussion, the Department provides input through comments on locally prepared
Planning documents. Additionally, the Department has prepared several documents for
Route 227. Any of these documents are available upon request.
CI understand you have a keen focus on the Prado Road interchange and how that project
may influence local circulation patterns, and subsequently how it would shape the local
neighborhood and community. The Department has been coordinating with the Citv
regj!ft9-how the pXojectselatcsAQ Route 101. You have raised questions about whether
a new Prado Road extension could be re-designated as Route 227. To the series of
Valbr w improves mobility acros§California'
l
Eugene Judz4d�-
June 28, 2004
Page 2
questions outlined in an e-mail my staff received before Thursday's meeting, I can
provide the following information:
■ The Department can consider a relinquishment of a portion of the existing Route
227 if a suitable alternate route is identified. This relinquishment and re-
designation process would.be subject to action by the California Transportation
Commission (CTC).
■ If the City proposed to construct a new section of roadway for the purposes of
designating it as Route 227, this would require the City to plan, design and
construct the road in accordance with the State's Highway Desigtn Manual. This
decision process also must comply with all applicable State and Federal
environmental regulations. Adoption of a new section of Route 227 would require
CTC action
• The Department can consider adoption of another existing local road into the State
highway system, as part of Route 227; this process was accomplished once before
when the Department relinquished sections of Route 227 along Broad and Higuera
Streets in exchange for the South Street connection.
■ A new local road connection (e.g., Prado Road extension as a city street
to the
existing Route 227 would require an encroachment permit from a State
however, it would not require CTC action.
�I The focus for much of this discussion lies with the City's circulation element, which I
S. {I understand is being proposed for an update with the City's 2005/07 budget. I would
�o encourage you to continue working closely with the City and the San Luis Obispo
Council of Governments. to express your vision for growth in the community. The
Department will also remain involved to the:extent discussions involve State highways.
I look forward to continuing dialogue with you along with our transportation partners for
the future of this area. Like you, my expectation is that the dialogue will lead us to
outcomes that support a sustainable future.
Sce y,
i
G G ALBRIGHT
D 'ct Director
"Caltrans improves mobility across CabPorma
Attachment 4
. o
o
/ y
H V w
44 w w
O O O O
6� 7y7 F.
p � y O O w
Co
C .y
C O O •D •C
zaz
oA
� oy v d •ov � y w
°
y
a
pd o o
V rn 04 �C 1% ;;. Ca �' q b p c a
cc v° 3 ^ bow° Q O v •a° o
w m
as Z
° Uav � � • � � o � 3 � � Q � o
o ;
V dQgaK � .e �saflo q d c� i°bc
o
00,
Q . o � eis � � � � `� o � C � e .� qm v° aKi dd °'
•a p: a° GL U� 9� w9a�'ia, °O' yyy 48 SO �. .o0 '° ° �
a y O �+ ' V G D
qq?� 0 C v W
O °� � O
9a'a `� a �V.• ' . . po cisQaOL' U.mbeoV EDC ..0
ao o ° o y
Cg 'd . m
U of oC. -
09 14 ro 19 u
r- t, Co
1�1
41
- C
fry M d
bo
C` E � a � �_ � w °� � ' 'a
,,
O � O O O Qy pty o 0
o � U gyg 0v�i e .°�
Ca
.. h
,-, Attachm
Q 9 C N J
D O i. 7 O C d N
000 q N 3 e0c NrJ" d
u tyV b N F. �+
ca
u d 4 y Q Q
N ,� ^ N W W 1.. ca y n N
cc
v o°o d q a '3 '" CO a0o v iCL
6 GC v q aqi
00, a'' cog � 9Ae �
W
� � •o � '� v1 0: � d d 'o e m v w L'
0 5 0cc � � c c °' o c o
q p a .s dq oe3u a: Eagb
V° � m
a ] y3a 4 INA u
r
3 e b too Q a w°p�
N of
•••QQQ .. qy�
D0p Q :+ O C L S7 y0 •� O .0w
y C 9 y 0 L7 e0 Q � C O 0) •0 N b W
tJ 7 •C en 9
� R •y V W 0 00 " •� K W •• b •0O
Q � wC q
!4009
C baa N O ^ :: co
V O tC
ECHO, q m
r. � y 9 U of dp a ° a oa3i 90 pQq v° b &0
(e a c o o ca
ID r' 2
= a. .a
g. d � � a o p� m > > a°
o ca
mma � 3 flE 'aa° ° ° n: � '� y � a �eo � SO ° a wz �
p4°. R S a 0 07p .5 u � 8 a c m ^ � � o u � m � 6 d = oma
0 oodaeS3 oc � gov" �- 4daav � o =� � �°, mdo
c vvo � °� ' b � ° � mv° ooeE" 04 °' ? 0 8 o9w q aq
a Naa1 � a � a � x � xQQow
NN
O
0000 O 00 O
00 00
O�
C
O 00
Cc p, 0 0000 9 •bv F, C
fi
°
CO aqi 0
GO
CD vw cclwg
CJ u7 .07� cT ¢ a � ac tor-
Cd �
Attachment 4
U � " g2 v
e m
02
� '� � � p S•0'.rJ � .a
�a � Oo •�
d
� e � H
C .., a °
15 .. e a 3as
a
03
y A
mWdu Elan
to
CS 0
mix
co W
o e � u
M -0 o °u 'm� cE � a g a;
°
�
40. 0 yv as .8vQ � H -� a .� a b -
s � •
o
C) g o
p' C1.4 N
N N o
N N '
� y �N NA� 43
wa
To City of San Luis Obispo froi, ichael Sullivan-for Planning Commission he of 6-09-2004
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 1 of 3
6-09--2004
To: City of San Luis Obispo 7(p of 4
RE: Planning Commission hearing 6/09/2004 - Public Hearing - anta Area and Airport
Area- SP/ER 73-00
From: Michael Sullivan, 1127 Seaward St., San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 545-9614
Glossary of abbreviations/acronyms
CEQA- California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Sec. 21000 et seq)
CEQA GL-CEQA Guidelines (Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sec. 15000 et seq)
GL- Guidelines (of CEQA)
EM - Environmental Impact Report
LOVR - Los Osos Valley Road
SLO - San Luis Obispo
June 9, 2004
To: City of San Luis Obispo (Planning Commission)
From: Michael C. Sullivan, 1127 Seaward St., San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
SUBJECT: Comments for Planning Commission hearing of 4/28/2004 -Margarita/
OAirport Specific Plan and Environmental Review
Dear Commissioners:
1. The City is proposing significant changes to the alignment of Prado Road in conjunction
with the Margarita/Airport Specific Plan. These changes require an amendment to the
circulation element of the General Plan.
Recently(early 2001) the City made modifications to the alignment of Prado Road for the so called
"northern alignment" for the part of Prado Road near the base of the South Hills at Broad Street. This change
in road alignment required environmental review by the City,because it is an amendment of the Circulation
Elemenrof the General Plan. A mitigated negative declaration was approved by the city. Similarly, the City
is currently(3/2004)proposing another re-alignment of Prado Road in a different segment of the road within
the Margarita area. This modification in the circulation element requires an environmental review under the
requirements of CEQA. This specific modification was not analyzed as part of the proposed Margarita/
Airport draft EIR or final EIR. At a minimum,the City should require a supplemental EIR focused on this
modification of the circulation element,or include the environmental review as part of the current Margarita
plan environmental review and EIR process. Preferably, there should be a separate environmental review for
the entire Prado Road project, including the proposed change in the road alignment;as outlined below.
2. "Piecemeal" (segmented) environmental review for Prado Road/Highway 227 project is
improper and illegal.
These comments follow up on similar concerns given in my letter to the City/Planning Commission,
dated 3-23-2004,for the Planning Commission hearing of 3-24-2004 for the Margarita/Airport specific plan
�\
and environmental.review.
To City of San Luis Obispo.. n Michael Sullivan-for Planning Commission—wring of 6-09-2004
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Page 2 of 3 -
I am concerned about-the improper and apparently illegal "piecemealing" (segmenting)of the
environmental review for the revised plan for Highway 227 (Prado Road,and Dalidio Drive)which will run
from Madonna Road to Broad Street.
Some examples of segmentation of the environmental review:
-Northern alignment portion of Prado Road received separate environmental review and Negative
Declaration (2001);
-Margarita portion of Prado Road is receiving environmental review, presumably,as part of Specific Plan
for Margarita/Airport Specific Plan and Environmental Review (still in progress as of 4/28/04);
-On Tuesday,April 20,2004,the City Council stated that yet another environmental review would be
required for the segment of Highway 227 from US 101 to Higuera Street(including a new bridge at Prado
and Higuera).
There remain significant,unmitigated and unanalyzed traffic impacts of two types: (a) impacts caused
by other nearby projects on traffic within the Margarita/Airport areas; (b) impacts caused by the Margarita
/Airport plan in nearby project areas (i.e. 101 corridor, certain intersections which will be severely impacted
following the completion of Dalidio and Margarita projects,such as Los Osos Valley Road at Madonna
Road; 101 south of Los Osos Valley Rd.;etc.). .
(a) Dalidio "Marketplace" project's draft and final EIR has only addressed a portion of the,traffic impact on
Prado Road; the study area only reaches as far east as Prado Rd.at Higuera Street. Planning Commissioner
Boswell has previously(25 Feb 2004)stated in public hearings for the Dalidio/Marketplace project that the
traffic analysis study area for the Dalidio/Marketplace project is too small. I expressed similar concerns in
my letter of 3-11-2004 to City of SLO and Planning Commission with comments on the draft EIR for the
Dalidio project. In that letter I stated that a substantial amount(12%)of project-generated traffic from
Dalidio would impact Prado Road and beyond(e.g.Broad SQ; however the response of Rincon Consultants
(4-22-2004 letter to M.Sullivan)is the following:
Response 12J..... "The traffic distributed to Prado Road and Tank Farm Road east of Higuera Street would
be distributed over a fairly large arra that includes the Margarita Area,Broad/Orcutt area,and Tank Farm
Road east of Broad Street. With project traffic "spread" over these areas,potential impacts were only
anticipated where this traffic would be concentrated(i.e.;near the Prado Road/Higuera Street and Tank
Farm Road/Higuera intersections)closer to the project site. Thus,the analysis was focused on the Higuera
Street corridor."
This response is inadequate and ignores the real impacts of traffic along the Prado Road corridor that arise
from the large Dalidio project(regional shopping center). Of course,eventually the traffic impacts are
spread out over larger area,but only after the traffic passes through the Margarita area: The response offers
no responsible detailed traffic analysis to reach its unreasonable conclusions.
(b) A similar deficiency in response is seen in the same Response 12J in the Dalidio final EIR. I had
pointed out that the Margarita project will add traffic that can and most likely will increase the traffic along
the 101 corridor including south of Los Osos Valley Road. This will add to the traffic burden associated
with the Costco project EIR which had predicted the need to add at least one lane to 101 southbound within
10 years (i.e. 10 years from 3/2003,the date of the Costco draft EIR). The Rincon response(12J),Dalidio
FEIR,also contained in letter of 4-22-2004 from Rincon Consultants to Michael Sullivan)states that "It
should be noted that the current City General Plan Circulation element does not identify plans to widen
Highway 101 to 6 lanes." But CEQA requires analysis of actual potential impacts, regardless of what the
General Plan does or does not include measures for mitigation.
The city should prepare,an updated EIR(for example,a focused EIR)which examines the total stretch of
Prado Road/Highway 227 simultaneously,comprehensively,and.cumulatively, not in segments as is now
To.City of SanLuisObispo froi, ,ichael Sullivan-for Planning Commission h� \g of 6-09-2004
regarding Margarita/Airport Area Specific Plan and Environmental Review Paie 3 of 3 ® p
being done. The inadequate,segmented environmental analysis curr ently being used b tt a City analysis Y®
of the Prado Road/Highway 227 corridor constitutes a violation of CEQA.
City staff have implied,in recent Planning Commission hearings on this matter, that the 1994 Circulation
Element update environmental review covered the significant environmental issues of the entire Prado Road
corridor from Madonna Rd to US'101 and eastward from US 101 through the Margarita area to Broad Street.
However,the 1994 final EIR(Circulation and Land Use and Circulation elements-updates)is deficient as a
currently viable environmental document in several respects,for example: .
-Various assumptions of the 1994 FEIR are outdated or invalid. Examples: Assumption of city population
of 42,480(1992 figure) (newer population projections are needed for the traffic model); Assumption that
US 101 would be 6 lanes from Santa Rosa to Los Osos Valley Rd(this change is.not likely to occur for a
long time); Assumption that Tank Farm Rd would be 4 lanes from Broad to Higuera(this may be delayed a
long time).
-1994 Final EIR(Land use and circulation elements -updates)states;without any factual justification,that
no significant cumulative impacts would occur as a result of the road widenings or extensions(for example,
Prado Rd extension from 101 to Madonna Rd). Certainly there will be major cumulative impacts from newer
projects like Dalidio Marketplace,although that project's final EIR did not have a traffic study area that
covered the part of Prado Road beyond(east of) Higuera Street!
3. The final EIR for the Margarita/Airport Specific Plan should not be certified because the
responses in the final EIR do not properly address some of the concerns of comme tern on the draft
EIR. Some examples of inadequate responses are given in paragraph 2, above. Many more
examples exist!
4. The Planning Commission should-re-examine the possible alternatives to the current Prado Road
design in order to minimize the major environmental impacts caused by the northern alignment of
Prado Rd. The Final EIR for the 1994 Land Use and Circulation elements -update contained a
figure 3.7-1, variation F, which showed Prado and Tank Faun connected. This variation should be
adopted (or at least recommended to City Council)because it would meet the objectives for a cross-
town route on Prado Rd yet would also significantly decrease the environmental impacts associated
with the northern alignment (e.g. visual, archaeological, noise, safety, biological issues). .
Sincerely,
Michael C. Sullivan
Attachments
1- Figure 3.7-1, Circulation variations to the proposed project
Source: 1994 Final EIR, Land Use and Circulation elements - update(City-of SanLuis Obispo)
2. Map 01 - Existing Prado Rd configuration
3. Map 02 Potential Prado Rd configuration
I
�O :.'� :....i•- i i �'`, j/ .aF....•:,,.\ 'y----.•••-� Til/CSc
..1 �.v......... ... i
//' , ♦ ` •' it : `�•..i .'.`a.: •..a• A/ •/a/ / I•h•••••G/
�. ..
} <v a E
\ .�...•..« q r r i: '•x»w:w.:W.La«�.d h«..e•`o i I•\n �,/a a . :
Yt
f - � : �' a•.,! cwt
4 OV'
- ,
/ , •h--- \ •. i 1....1.i.1•:........«..afar.•, •e •'.c..:•...... " 1
K
A.
� � M
IF
'♦ `�/f`•� w.,�..,i....s� Q ..'f".r moi,� � a i>t. .
to ' r....•:•r � / '/••••` '� • �f
•rras '
�• } «. • •rurrr rrwrrrrrrrrul rrrr• i aur !'••� t
ft a............................a�•�
..............................
_...•...................
............•rrwr.-v -..........\ \a a
� • � as•.
11
,i' rrrrr 'a
j
z, VARIAn0N
A Hwy 1 Reliever is Rural Roues H South Street overpass not built
B Hwy 1 Resever coral as to LOUR I Osos and Broad freeway ramps dosed
C Santa Rose widened to 6 lanes J Broad Street freeway ramp dosed
D Sante Rose underpass at FocM; K Sacramento Drive extended to Ora+tt
Murray Intersection dosed L Prado overpass at Wgis a Street
E Hwy 1 Reliever is 44ene freeway M Prado Road freeway ramps
F Prado is major east-west route widened to 2 lanes
a Prado and Tank Farm connected
OIL
:
0
I'f rte
��UIIIII�IIII' I�I�1�IIt
O� CIRCULATION VARIATIONS
Sail tuts OBISPO TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
9911 palm Stre"Post otfm Box 8100•San Lug Obispo.CA 93403-8100
{�oRp p MeC a land 3-26 FIGURE 3.7-1
�' ''tel' � !.�-� •���'
Elew.
.,
P4 el�
., • ism .r /I••= . l
• 41.
f ...
Dole
go% /��.: •all , 1� ='�
l.s` . '� .....,0000.
I;Y►•
1
�•►
f ' iMa
Mi.
Ws
Will
.100
,41
rl,
f' f
To City of San Luis Obispo from b_ ml Sullivan•ATTENTION: John Mandeville,D4_..or,Department Page 1 of 4
May 7,2004
o May 7,2004
G® � Nv1 rr �
To: 2
Mr.John Mandeville,Director a
Community Development Department
City of San Luis Obispo,CA
990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
From:
Michael Sullivan, 1127 Seaward St., San Luis Obispo,CA 93405 (805)545-9614
REGARDING: (1) CEQA review of Prado Road/Highway 227 project; (2) Circulation
element amendment for modified alignment of Prado Road; (3) Public participation in
design of interchange at U.S. 101/Los Osos Valley Road
Glossary of abbreviations/acronyms
CEQA-California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code,Sec.21000 et sec)
CEQA GL-CEQA Guidelines(Code of Regulations,Title 14,Sec. 15000 et.seq)
GL-Guidelines(of CEQA)
EIR-Environmental Impact Report
LOVR-Los Osos Valley Road
O SLO-San Luis Obispo
Mr.Mandeville:
This letter expresses some of my concerns about procedural deficiencies for the Margarita/
Airport specific plan and environmental review and for the environmental review for the Dalidio/
Marketplace project Please refer to the following attachments:
-Copy of my 3-page letter to the Planning Commission(for Margarita/Airport hearing of
4/282004)
Copy of my 9-page letter to the Planning Commission(for Margarita/Airporthearing of
3/242004)
Please respond to me in writing,as soon as possible,regarding the following items:
1. The City is proposing significant changes to the alignment of Prado Road in conjunction
with the Margarita/Airport Specific Plan. These changes require an amendment to the
circulation element of the General Plan,as was done for the"northern alignment"
modification of Prado Road in 2000-2001. Why does a change in the Prado Road alignment
require amendment of the circulation amendment in 2000-2001 (northern alignment)but not
now(for proposed new alignment of central portion of Prado Rd.)?
Recently(early 2001)the City made modifications to the alignment of Prado Road for the so
called"northern alignment" for the part of Prado Road near the base of the South Hills at Broad
Street. This change in road alignment required environmental review by the City,because it is an
• amendment of the Circulation Element of the General Plan- A mitigated negative declaration was
approved by the city. Similarly,the City is currently(32004)proposing another re-alignment of
Prado Road in a different segment of the road within the Margarita area. This modification in the
circulation element requires an environmental review under the requirements of CEQA. This
To City of San Luis Obispo from N...,aaO Sullivan-ATTENTION: John Mandeville,Diff"",Department Page 2 of 4
May 7,2004 U OF ¢--
specific modification was not analyzed as part of the proposed Margarita/Airport draft EIR or final
EIR At a minimum,the City should require a supplemental EIR focused on this modification of
the circulation element,or include the environmental.review as part of the current Margarita plan
environmental review and EIR process. Preferably,there should be a separate environmental
review for the entire Prado Road project,including the proposed change in the road alignment,as
outlined below.
2. "Piecemeal"(segmented)environmental review for Prado Road/Highway 227 project is
improper and illegal. Why has the City allowed this improper procedure to occur?
These comments follow up on similar concerns given in my letter to the City/Planning
Commission,dated 3-23-2004,for the Planning Commission hearing of 3-242004 for the
Margarita/Auport.specific plan and environmental review.
I an concerned about the improper and apparently illegal "piecemealing" (segmenting)of the
environmental review for the revised plan for Highway 227(Prado Road,and Dalidio Drive)which
will run from Madonna Road to Broad Street.
Some examples of segmentation of the environmental review:.
-Northern alignment portion of Prado Road received separate environmental review and Negative
Declaration(early 2001);
-Margarita portion of Prado Road is receiving environmental review,presumably,as part of
Specific Plan for Margarita/Airport Specific Plan and Environmental Review(still in progress as
of 4/28/04); however,apparently the Prado Road will be developed in segments over a period of
years,although its alignment and design will be pre-determined(as part of.Margarita/Airport
plan);
-Dalidio portion of Prado Road(now called Dalidio Drive),between Madonna Road and U.S. 101,
and including a proposed freeway interchange at US 101 and Prado Rd., is receiving separate
environmental review for that project.
-On Tuesday,April 20,2004,the City Council stated that yet another environmental review would
be required for the segment of Highway 227 from US 101 to Higuera Street(including a new bridge
at Prado and Higuera). Council person Christine Mulholland stated(4/20/04)the opinion that this is
one more indication that the environmental review for the Prado Road/Highway 227 project is
being improperly segmented-
There remain significant,unmitigated and unanalyzed traffic impacts of two types: (a) impacts
caused by other nearby projects on traffic within the Margarita/Airport areas; (b) impacts caused
by the Margarita/Airport plan in nearby project areas(i.e. 101 corridor, certain intersections
which will be severely impacted following the completion of Dalidio and Margarita projects,such
as Los Osos Valley Road at Madonna.Road; 101 south of Los Osos Valley Rd.;etc.).
(a) Dalidio "Marketplace"project's draft and final EIR has only addressed a portion of the traffic
impact on Prado Road; the study area only reaches as far east as Prado Rd. at Higuera Street.
Planning Commissioner Boswellhas previously(25 Feb 2004)stated in public hearings for the
Dalidio/Marketplace project that the traffic analysis study area for the Dalidio/Marketplace
project.is too small. I expressed similar concerns in my letter of 3-11-2004 to City of SLO and
Planning Commission with comments on the draft EIR for the Dalidio project In that letter I stated
that a substantial amount(12%)of project-generated traffic from Dalidio would impact Prado Road
and beyond(e.g. Broad St); however the response of Rincon Consultants(422-2004 letter to M.
Sullivan) is the following:
To City.of San Luis Obispo from'i.,_.iael Sullivan-ATTENTION: John]Mandeville,D. _,.or,Department Page 3 of 4
May 79 2004
COF
Response 12J..... "The traffic distributed to Prado Road and Tank Farm Road=east-t of Higuera Street
would be distributed over a fairly large area that includes the Margarita Area,Broad/Orcutt area,
and Tank Farm Road east of Broad Street. With project traffic "spread"over these areas,potential
impacts were only anticipated where this traffic would be concentrated(i.e.,near the Prado Road/
Higuera Street and Tank Farm Road/Higuera intersections)closer to the project site. Thus,the
analysis was focused on the Higuera Street corridor."
This response is inadequate and ignores the real impacts of traffic along the Prado Road corridor
that arise from the large Dalidio project(regional shopping center). Of course,eventually the traffic
impacts are spread out over a larger area,but only after the traffic passes through the Margarita area.
The response offers no responsible detailed traffic analysis to reach its unreasonable conclusions.
(b) A similar deficiency in response is seen in the same Response 12J In the Dalidio final EIR. I
had pointed out that the Margarita project will add traffic that can and most likely will increase the
traffic along the 101 corridor including south of Los Osos Valley Road. This will add to the traffic
burden associated with the Costco project EIR which had predicted the need to add at least one lane
to 101 southbound within 10 years(i.e. 10 years from 32003,the date of the Costco draft EIR).
The Rincon response(12J),Dalidio FEIR,also contained in.letter of 422-2004 from Rincon
Consultants to Michael Sullivan)states that"It should be noted that the current City General Plan
Circulation element does not identify plans to widen Highway 101 to 6 lanes." But CEQA requires
O analysis of actual potential impacts,regardless of what the General Plan does or does not include
measures for mitigation.
The city should prepare an updated EIR(for example,a focused EIR)which examines the total
stretch of Prado Road/Highway 227 simultaneously,comprehensively,and cumulatively,not in
segments as is now being done. The inadequate,segmented environmental analysis currently being
used by the City for analysis of the Prado Road/Highway 227 corridor constitutes a violation of
CEQA.
Furthermore,note that this public project(the revised Highway 227/Prado Road project,
running from Madonna Road to Higuera Street to Broad Street)requires environmental review at
an early stage. CEQA requires agencies to prepare EIRs and negative declarations"as early as
feasible in the planning process to enable environmental considerations to influence project
program and design and yet late enough to provide meaningful information for environmental
assessment." CEQG GL 15004(b). And,with public projects(e.g.Prado Road), "at the earliest
feasible time,project sponsors shall incorporate environmental considerations into project
conceptualization,design,and planning. CEQA compliance should be completed prior to
acquisition of a site for a public project." CEQA GL 15004(b)(1). Agencies shall.not"take any
action which gives impetus to a planned or foreseeable project in a manner that forecloses
alteratives or mitigation measures that would ordinarily be part of CEQA review of that public
project." CEQA GL 15004(bx2)(B). During recent(Dec.2003 -Apr. 2004)public hearings
(Planning Commission)for Margarita/Airport Specific Plan,members of city staff stated that
additional environmental review would occur for future parts of the project as they occur. However,
for the public road part of the project(i.e.,Prado Road),the comprehensive environmental review
should occur early.
To City of San Luis Obispo from Mrcnwl Sullivan-ATTENTION: Jobn Mandeville;Dim.xor,Department Page 4 of.4
May 7,2004 �.
3. Please explain why the public participation in the US 101 /LOVR interchange design
alternatives has been stifled.
Approidmately one year ago,the City held a public forum to discuss various design alternatives
for the proposed U.S. 1011 Los Osos Valley Road freeway interchange. Mr.Tmi Bochum,of the
City Public Works Dept., stated at that first meeting that additional public meetingswould occur,
that people who had provided their names and addresses at the first meeting would be notified of
future public meetings. I never received such notification,and I know other persons who had
attended the first meeting who also said they were never notified about subsequent meetings. Why
did the Cityfail to notify us? When were these promised subsequent meetings held,and what was
discussed and decided? What additional public meetings,if any,will be held to discuss this issue?
I and several other people,including Eugene Jud,advocated the alternative which carried eastbound
traffic from the interchange toward the south and then connecting to Buckley Road, I believe this
was called"Alternative 7." It seems to us that perhaps the reason why we were not notified of
subsequent hearings was that the City had essentially already made up its mind about its selection of
alternatives and therefore did not want additional public'scrutiny. If that is true,it certainly does not
seem proper or democratic.
r
sincerely,
Michael C. Sullivan
Notice of Determination
• �-alb
X Office of Planning and Research FROM: City of San Luis Obispo
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Community Development Department
Sacramento, CA 95814 990 Palm Street
1L County Clerk San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
—.
County of San Luis Obispo
1144 Monterey Street, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 �.�✓ `��
Subject:
Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code
Project Title
Damon-Garcia Sports Fields (ER 185-99)
State Clearinghouse Number ,Lead Agency Area Code/Telephone/Ex
(If Submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person
Michael Codron, Associate Planner (805) 781-7175
"Project Location (include county): 3615 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo (San Luis Obispo)
ject Description:
e proposed plan includes four tournament size soccer fields as the primary use. The turf areas can also be stripe
mmodate football and rugby as well as up to eight or nine smaller soccer fields for the fall youth socc
n. The fields are planned to be used year-round and in the evenings. Night field lighting is proposed.
Ilary park features include parking for about 150 cars, a restroom, concession and maintenance buildings of 7;
re feet, 400 square feet, and 440 square feet respectively, concrete pedestrian paths up to 12 feet wide fi
*ergency and maintenance vehicle access, two pedestrian bridges and screen /windbreak tree planting. Parking fi
use times will ultimately be provided with a combination of on-site parking and off-site parking. The 150 on-si,
g•spaces will be supplemented by off-site parking on adjoining land to the south (about 200 cars) under
iip9sed agreement with the owner of that property.
e, project includes enhancement of Acacia Creek by creating a 2.5 acre conservation / wildlife corridor on bol
reof the creek. The project will result in the loss of about one acre of jurisdictional wetland, which will be replace
routing Orcutt Creek and creating an enhanced wetland corridor and riparian area. The project maintains a
gage top of creek bank setback for fields and walks of approximately 35 feet for Acacia Creek. For the re-create
Creek Channel, the setback from the normal-water flow, incised channel is an average of approximately 2
areas up to 35 feet. The proposed project is consistent with and implements the Mitigation Monitorin
for the Prado Road Extension Circulation Element Amendment adopted February 2000.
rpQosed project includes the following features to mitigate impacts identified during the design process:
estoration and enhancement of degraded creek habitat and unstable banks
sting of structures and parking to protect from flood hazard
ung design that does not increase flood stage storm water levels off-site
esign of sports field lighting to minimize off-site light spillage
kation of low-reflectivity paint to the field light poles and back sides of the lamp reflector housings
-0 'tee. aimed water for irrigation
on on the use of loudspeaker public address systems
Park closure and field lights off at 10:00 P.M. to allow wildlife movement d
• Incorporation of receptacles for recyclable materials on the site
• Inclusion of bike racks (1/10 parking spaces), preferential carpool parking, and shade trees in the parking lot
to reduce direct and indirect air quality impacts
This is to advise that the City Council [E Lead Agency ❑ Responsible Agency] has approved the above describe(
project on June 18.2002, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project:
1. The project [❑will ■ will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
■ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures [®were [❑ were not] made a condition of approval of the project.
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [0 was ■was not] adopted for this project.
5. Findings [Ewere ❑ were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final EIR/Negative Declaration and record of project approval is available to the general
public at:
City of San Luis Obispo, Community Development Department, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
sYG 0
gnatur (Public Agency) Date
Ronald Whisenand, Deputy Community Development Director
Date received for filing at OPR:
�e�tooas�)
FILE®
JUN 212002
JULIE L ROpEM%00UHVMW
bYVIM M:SHELBY
DEPUTY CM .
( i
i
DAMON-GARCIA RANCH ��` er
7.ad4°
Owner's Response to:
N
MARGARITA AREA. SPECIFIC PLAN
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL HEARING DRAFT
SEPTEMBER 71 2004
Summary Request:
The Damon and Garcia Families respectfully request the City Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo accept the attached "Damon-Garcia Ranch
Plan" as the property owners suggestions for modifications to the
Planning Commission Draft-Margarita Area Specific Plan. The owners
further request that the Council authorize the .Mayor, in conjunction with
the Directors of City Planning and Public Works, to enter into negotiations
with the Damon and Garcia Families and their representatives to prepare
agreements for Council ratification of the following:
1) Dedication of the Public Rights of Way to the City for the timely
construction of Phase 1 of Prado Road across the Damon-Garcia Ranch;
2) Processing an application before LAFCO, in conjunction with other
MASP and AASP property owners, for timely ,annexation of their properties
to the City of San Luis Obispo consistent with the Margarita Area Specific
Plan as amended to be consistent with appropriate suggested
modifications contained in the Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan;
3) Upon annexation, process a predevelopment land division per the
Damon-Garcia Ranch Phasing Plan thus allowing for the .orderly sale and
subdivision of portions of land as necessary to facilitate the development
of the property per the MASP.
The D and Garcia Families an tan you or your consideration.
erry imons
Damon Garcia Ranch
Planning and Development Representative
O Pae 1
g
Damon=Garcia..Ranch Plan
BACKGROUND
The Damon and Garcia Families are the successors to their family
ranch originally known as the "Brugelli Ranch": The Ranch, now known as
the Damon-Garcia Ranch, has been the family home to successive
generations for more than half a century and currently houses three
generations of the Family. In the early 1980's, development pressures
from the Airport Area precipitated the formation of a County of San Luis
Obispo Service Area (CSA 22) for creation of the Airport Area Specific
Plan (AASP). The AASP was to define the land uses in anticipation of
annexation to San Luis Obispo. In response to CSA 22, the Damon-Garcia
Ranch owners joined with their neighbors to the west, the West Side
Property Owners, (WSPO) to pursue the :Margarita Area Specific Plan
(MASP).
The Damon and Garcia Families are not land developers. They have
been motivated to participate in the MASP to plan the future of their
property while preserving their county lifestyle to the greatest extent
possible. As lifetime members of the community, the Families have
proudly participated in the creation of the newest community sports field %
which bears their names. It is their hope that the ultimate development of
the Ranch will be a positive legacy for the San Luis Obispo Community.
Dominant Issues for the Damon and Garcia families
The Ranch is the single largest land ownership in the MASP. The
MASP represents both an opportunity and a challenge for the owners. The
prospect for change of the magnitude envisioned by the MASP presents a
primary dilemma for the Family: How to facilitate the evolution of the the
property as defined by the MASP with a minimum of dislocation of the
family from their ancestral home and lifestyle?
The Owners Response to the MASP, The Damon Garcia Ranch Plan, is
focused on solving this primary concern of the family.
Page 2
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
C�
Location
Situated between the end of Prado Road and Broad Street, the Ranch
is a singular opportunity for the .much needed East/West connection to
enhance city wide circulation. As it crosses the Ranch, the extension of
Prado Road is the backbone of the land use planning for the Ranch.
Two principal intersection have been defined by the San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department. In their plan (see Exhibit #1) Public Works
establishes their requirements for connecting the Ranch land uses to
Prado Road. The unnamed Collector we have identified as EW3 intersects
with Prado Road and serves the Business Park land uses south of Prado and
is the primary entrance to the residential land uses north of Prado Road.
The Santa Fe Road intersection provides a collector node at the easterly
end of the residential land uses. We have identified this collector as
"North Santa Fe Road" as it continues into. the Ranch North of Prado Road
The Northerly half of the Ranch contains approximately 75 acres of
the South Hills. This area is planned to provide a substantial addition to
the open space inventory for the community. The Southerly boundary of the
Ranch borders the Union Oil property. This property line is also the
U northerly boundary of the Airport Area Specific Plan. Integration of the
land uses, circulation and environmental issues of the AASP with the
Ranch plan is an important part of the Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan.
General Plan for the Damon-Garcia Ranch
- To date, the Damon and Garcia Families have relied on the vision and
insights of the City Staff, the City's consultant planners, the Planning
Commission and Public input to formulate the details of the MASP as it.
relates to their property. On the whole, the process has worked well and
the family is fundamentally pleased with the efforts of others on their
behalf. At this pivotal point in the planning process, however, the Families
feel that they would be remiss if they did not respond in a proactive and
constructive way to the elements of the Plan that they feel are
inconsistent with their vision for the future of their property.
In order to make a meaningful contribution to the process, we have
prepared a direct response to each key component of the MA$P in the order
it is presented in MASP text. We have prepared The Damon Garcia Ranch
Plan to identify specific suggestions. Text modifications and additions are
shown as ...Italic text... as appropriate. The Ranch Plan is an overlay on the
O Page 3
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
_ L.✓� �� .
MASP. The Ranch Plan has been developed to incorporate requested
modifications to Circulation, Land use, and a predevelopment The
proposed predevelopment land divisions are shown on the -Predevelopnment
Parcels and Phases Plan to provide a phasing opportunity for the property
owners.
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Components
The Ranch Plan is aimed at helping achieve the transit oriented
development goals of the MASP.
SUMMARY
Open Space and Sensitive Resource Protection
The Ranch Plan designates about 45% of the Damon-Garcia property (90
acres) as.open space, including the South Hills, Acacia and minor creeks
and wetlands and about 10 acres as parks. This constitutes 50% of the
total open space and 100% of the parks for.the entire MASP.
Creation of a New Cohesive Neighborhood
Park "A" and the neighborhood commercial center as shown in the Ranch
Plan are intended help to create a social center and focal point for the
West and East neighborhoods and also provide a key transit hub for the
residences.
Transit Supporting Land Uses and Densities
The Ranch Plan incorporates the majority of the medium and High density
housing for the MASP (100% Medium-High and 100% High Density). As
these areas contain the most concentrated residential populations and
residents most likely to use public transit, bus stops will be identified in
Neighborhood Center the Ranch Plan.
Public Parks and Neighborhood Commercial Development should be
designed to provide consolidated parking facilities with an intentional
surplus of parking located at transit hubs to facilitate "Park and Ride"
opportunities for local residents.
A Pedestrian Friendly Environment
The Ranch Plan attempts to minimize the amount..of public roadway
Page 4
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
Al
O needed for circulation and relies on. large development parcels with
private drives and alleys and. bike paths and trails to maximize the
pedestrian friendly scale. .The collector streets shown on the Plan are the
only streets needing Public maintenance.
Minimizing infrastructure Costs
The Ranch Plan relies on a minimum of public roadways and the
creation of large development parcels to minimize infrastructure costs.
Minimizing the redundancy of in-street main lines for utilities necessary
to serve numerous street frontages should help reduce water, sewer,
electric and telecommunications infrastructure costs for the number of
residences served. This should also shift a significant continuing
maintenance burden from the public sector.
Consistency with the General Plan
The Ranch Plan is substantially consistent with the General Plan.
The following areas of the plan need to be evaluated for revision of the
General Plan:
O1) Rockview to Capitollo
2) Expansion of the Special Use Area
3) Expansion of the Damon-Garcia Sports Field (parking at Santa Fe)
The following are elements of the Ranch Plan that differ from the MASP:
1) Location of Santa Fe Road/Prado Road intersection
2) Adjustments to collector streets to simplify the Plan and allow for
phasing
3) Minor reallocations of Land use Categories near-the Neighborhood
Commercial Center
4) Removal of Neighborhood Commercial frontage on Prado Road
5) Proposal for expansion of Sports Field west to Santa Fe Road.
6) Development of an extension of Rockview to Capitollo Way and
creation of a transit hub at the end of Rockview at its prior intersection
with Broad
O
Page 5
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
OPEN SPACE AND PARKS
Hills
...Upon acceptance by the City of the hills dedication, it shall be the
responsibility of the City to provide such fencing and access gates as
shall be required to eliminate access by cattle and other livestock grazing
on the undeveloped portions of the Ranch ...
Creek Corridors
The Rockview/Capitollo area will provide for enhances riparian
opportunities, trails and a 100 year floor rated vehicle crossing of Acacia
Creek at Broad Street and Capitollo
Wet Lands
The portion of Acacia,Creek from Rockview to Capitollo can be
significantly enhanced as part of the reconfigured development proposed
for this portion of the Ranch.
The portion of Acacia Creek South of Capitollo is an identified area
for wetland redevelopment. This will be done in conjunction with the -
Special Use area development.
A portion of the southern property line while identified as a
"wetland' does not appear as such in the field. rehabilitation or expansion
in this area may be inconsistent with the goals of the AASP and ALUC for
minimizing bird populations. It is anticipated that the southern boundary
lowland area will provide the retention/detention basins necessary to
mitigate drainage impacts form Ranch development.
Storm water Detention
Portions of the Ranch Plan have been identified as Storm water
Detention/ retention areas.
Agricultural Land
The Damon-Garcia Ranch property has no Class I or Class II soils and
is not suitable for agriculture. The Ranch plan provides substantial land
conservation/open space thru the dedication of the South Hills and other
areas. The Ranch is providing _50 % of the total Open Space for the MASP.
Page 6
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
Parks Greens and Trails
The Ranch Plan provides 100% of the 10 acre Neighborhood Park and
has previously provided the land for the 16 acre sports field.
Neighborhood Park
The provision in the MASP calling for "no onsite parking" appears to
be at odds with the Neighborhood Commercial uses and will undoubtedly
cause for unnecessary friction between the commercial tenants, transit
users and the users of the park. The MASP should revisit this vital element
of the Plan. The Ranch Plan identifies common use parking to be jointly
developed and shared in this area of the Plan.
Greenspace
The Ranch Plan envisions the relocation of the Garcia Family
equestrian facility to this area. We believe this facility is consistent
with the stated goals of the MASP. It would be the intention of the
property owners to maintain ownership of this portion of the property
rather than to dedicate it as called for by the MASP. Private ownership
will allow for the preservation of the family ranch lifestyle, keep the
maintenance of the property from being a public burden. Operation of the
equestrian facility could be regulated by Use Permit to avoid any potential
conflicts with neighboring properties.
Greenways.
Greenways should be planned to minimize the invasion into the
privacy of adjacent private yards and should not be situated such that they
provide opportunities for attacks on pedestrians from unlighted or heavily
landscaped areas. Greenways should not be the sole method for access to
identified public parks and neighborhood services.
Sports Field
Continued evolution of improvements and operation of the Sports
Field shall not create unnecessary conflicts with the adjacent private
property. Concerns of night lighting hours, parking overflow during
scheduled events, fitter and trespass by users of the field should be
addressed by the Parks and Recreation management plan for the facility.
O
Page 7
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
COMMUNITY DESIGN
Sense of Place
The East and West Side Properties will have a decidedly different
character due to- topography, preexisting development patterns and
structures, circulation infrastructure and development patterns. The
opportunity to merge the East and West will be at the Neighborhood
Commercial center and Park A.
Development in this area should be encouraged to provide a variety
of goods and services in addition to opportunities for all day social
interaction at dine-in food and beverage neighborhood. restaurant(s) vs.
franchise fast-food take out.
Physical Identity and Image
The development of the clustered portions between the collector
streets should be encouraged to be named to give each portion it's
individual identity. Signage consistent with SLO sign standards should be
encouraged.
Central Transit Stop
A central transit stop should be developed in conjunction with Park
A and the Neighborhood Commercial Center. The transit stop should be
located such that riders are encouraged to take advantage of their wait by
shopping, snacking, or relaxing in the Park. Sufficient surplus parking
should. be developed at this location to provide for "park and ride" as well
as accommodate drive in users of the Park. If properly planned, this should
be an additional boost to the retail business and food establishments at
this location.
Transit Supportive Density
The highest density portions of the Ranch plan have been clustered
with the Neighborhood Center/Transit center as these development will
most likely have the greatest number of residents interested in transit
services.
Mixed Uses
Additional residential uses should be encouraged in the Neighborhood
Center above the ground floor. Properly oriented towards the park, these
units will aid. in the security of the park and after-hours at the
Page 8
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
0 Neighborhood Center
AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY
Setting
The Ranch sits under several zones of the County Airport Land use plan.
The South Hills provide a significant deterrent to low level over flights as
do the electric transmission towers located across the Ranch and over the
southerly end of the South Hills. Portions of the Ranch are viewed by the
Airport Land Use Commission as potential emergency landing sites. While
numerous emergency landings have occurred around the airport, to date
none have occurred on the Ranch.
Types and intensities of land Use
The Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) zone map overlay has been presented on
Exhibit #3 This exhibit indicates the total residential densities as
planned in the MASP and the calculations of the affected areas maximum
densities. The MASP appears to overstate the buidlout densities as would
be allowed per the ALUP. This becomes a concern of the Ranch Plan as it
O will be phased after the majority of the MASP .build out in the WSPO
properties. It is possible that a substantial loss of development potential
will occur if the WSPO builds out as per the MASP.
Performance Standards
In addition to over flight, noise generated by the airport is also a
consideration of the plan.
The Ranch Plan does not propose any uses that are inherently of risk to
aircraft. Height limits and avigation easements will be established to
insure no violation of Federal Aviation regulations Part 77.
Stonm water retention /detention basins shall be designed and maintained
in a manner that will not create an expanded bird habitat.
CIRCULATION FEATURES AND STANDARDS
Overall Approach-Transit Oriented Development.
It is envisioned that the transit route to be established will "loop
through" the West Side neighborhood with a principal stop at the
Neighborhood Center then proceed along North Santa Fe Road to the
Ointersection at Prado.
Page 9
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
N . rt?1
The linear nature of the available development portions of the Ranch --
suggest a single collector (North Santa Fe) with traffic dampening
facilities ( roundabouts, curves, choke downs, and bulbouts) along its
transit from Prado to Park A and the Neighborhood Center.
Street Names
The principal East-West collector should be named (North) Santa Fe
Road. The Loop around Park A and the Neighborhood Center should be named
by the WSPO.
The Families would like the opportunity to name the North-South
Collector from Prado Road into the center of the Ranch.
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Insufficient moderate/high density land has been designated in the
WSPO for compliance with the MASP housing affordability element. It is
envisioned that portions of the Ranch can be made available to the WSPO
or the City for compliance with this mitigation requirement.
Changes in the PFFP Update i
Continuing increases although inevitable should be revisited as they
impact the ability of the MASP to provide affordable housing.
IMPLEMENTATION
Annexation
The families are requesting annexation in conjunction with the nest
appropriate LAFCO request.
General Plan
The Ranch Plan anticipates some minor changes to the General Plan
as noted above.
Land use designations and Zoning
For purposes of evaluating consistency with ALUC and MASP density
maximums for the Damon= Garcia Ranch Plan, the medium development
density for each land use category has been used in calculations of build-
out unit counts.
Page 10
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
Subdivision
A predevelopment land division of the two existing Ranch parcels
into seven parcel is requested once the City has obtained subdivision
jurisdiction by annexation. The purpose of this land division is to
facilitate incremental sale and development per the Ranch Phasing Plan
Building Permits
It is the desire of the families to replace/relocate their current
residences into appropriate locations per the MASP. It is anticipated that
this will occur prior to annexation. this will require building permits from
the County of San Luis Obispo and concurrence by the City.
Phasing
A Ranch Phasing Plan incorporating the proposed predevelopment
land divisions has been provided. Modifications to the MASP
phasing/dedication plan at Table 13-Development and Facilities Links will
be needed to make these plans consistent.
Table 13: Development and Facilities Links
The Ranch Phasing Plan and Table 13 inconsistencies will need to be
resolved as part of the final MASP adoption process.
Interpretation and Amendment
It is the intent of the Ranch Plan to provide enough specificity to
allow for subsequent subdivision applications requiring a minimum of
interpretation. If necessary due to unforeseen circumstances, the Family
reserves the right to request an amendment per the conditions as set .forth
in the MASP.
Environmental Review
It is anticipated that the predevelopment land division requested to
facilitate the Ranch Phasing Plan will be able to rely on the MASP and
SP-enVironmentat-do-cements in as mucfi as no actual-pfiysical
development is permitted by this land division.
Page 11
Damon-Garcia Ranch Plan
-A
� 1
Lmw
544
gxx.4f 1,444;41.1
pt
Mo
MO
Ing
■
11,7♦ _ A,+,�,+,�, -
/,
ns�►tib�{'"r� T'� .;pt \ - .
I �
l
8
13111111`Ei
�Iu1t11001 �
/="207• II1■!1 ■. ■■ ■■a,,/r;�l� �a�.- ���lhz'}(
mum MM
@V&
I
iNOW No
RAW
N
Jo1r
oft
,..
no
MEAN
-...
1111
NER 11IIIUII ,,,. RPr(1.R nl.R7 1r a1�L%ih.J.7f :
��
11Mimi
POV
I 1
iF
. V
aaa
Was gap. ��.
Na
.IMF
Milo 1 -
iLri
[s � �� : . \
i X04 " Maw
H5 v
_!!M!![1 .C! � 7[Iyl�R 71_17
ural �. .. .�=Q •Z'/i:=c fiuv,] �'tL'i'rfs!tfiC►��:_
==`
�S��
Ell1
i 1 •�i/f GTi
A YJ�}�ttYSSuu?
yam(J�
• \ III �§//l..'�./������ Y'
l�.�i3�s�-'R�"�YL��I• , �1{ca���rs�.'Iti,.iC��f�� /� —
"�ylcn If:,
I r
.G
i
v.
• i .7 \
Y
7'
Page 1 of 1
Allen Settle- Margarita Area Costs
From: <ANCARTER@aol.com>
To: <asettle@slocity.org>, <cmulholland@slocity.org>, <kschwartz@slocity.org>, <jewan@slocity.org>,<dromero@slocity.org>
Date: 9/29/2004 9:04 AM
Subject: Margarita Area Costs
CC: <khampian@slocity.org>, <BSTATLER@slocity.org.>, <AHooper@slocity.org>
Dear Council Members:
I made a mistake last night in the number I told you concerning the impact fees that will be imposed on dwelling units in
the Margarita Area for their share of the Prado Road interchange. For that, I'm sorry. I.should know better than to make a
quick calculation in the middle of a meeting.
I said the cost would be$194 for each single family detached home. According to the MASP document, that:would be the
annual cost if a Community Facilities District were formed and the landowners chose to finance the impact fees overtime.
According to the document,the cost of their share of the interchange would be$983 per single family detached home if
paid at once. (Please see my calculations for both numbers below.)
On October 12th, I'm sure we'll learn from staff whether there has been any escalation in that amount since the MASP
document was prepared. Under any scenario, it's hard to imagine$983 morphing into $11,000.
I have asked Christine to provide me with a copy of the document prepared by Marketplace opponents which outlines
their$11,000 number. It would be helpful if she provide that document to Bill Statler as well.
In the future, I hope we will all stick to the facts, not fiction.
Andrew Carter
1283 Woodside Drive
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
805-594-1906(home)
805471-8103(cell)
ancarter@aol.com
Calculations
p. 75, MASP document:
Share of Prado Rd. interchange=$2.6 million.
This is 19.8%of the$13.0 million in total Margarita Area transportation "community facilities."
p. 77, Annual cost_H Community Facilities District bond is taken out:
For all transportation costs (annually)=$980 per single family detached unit.
Prado Rd. interchange portion (annually)= $980 x 19.8% _$194.
p. 79, No bond, impact fees paid up front:
For all transportation costs (one time)=$4,959 per single family detached unit.
Prado Rd. interchange portion (one time) =$4,959 x 19.8%=$983
Please note: Under either scenario,the costs to multifamily units are less.
file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW)0000LHTM 9/30/2004