PURPOSE:

This report requests that the City Council approve a zone text amendment that would create new �shopping center� and �power center� (big box shopping center) zoning use categories that would be conditionally permitted and prohibited, respectively, in the Airport zone, and permitted in various commercial zones throughout the City.

BACKGROUND:

Property Location: The proposed zone text amendment would primarily affect all land in the City of Burbank that is zoned Airport, approximately 436 acres in size (Exhibit A-1).  Although the zone text amendment would also establish new uses in commercial zones throughout the City, the new uses would not have any practical impact on areas outside of the Airport zone.

Zoning: The zone text amendment would primarily impact all land that is zoned AP Airport.  Adjacent and abutting properties to the Airport zone are zoned M-2 General Industrial, C-3 Commercial General Business, CEM Cemetery, and Planned Development No. 89-1 (Burbank Airport Hilton Hotel and Convention Center).

General Plan Designation: All areas that are zoned Airport are designated for Airport land use in the General Plan Land Use Element.  The zoning is consistent with this General Plan designation.

Current Development of the Site: The majority of land that is zoned Airport is owned by, or held in trust for the benefit of, the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.  The only Airport-zoned parcel that is owned by a private party is the former Costco site located at the intersection of Sherman Way and Vineland Avenue.  This site is approximately 11.4 acres in size and is currently developed with a 143,716 square foot structure that was formerly utilized by Costco Wholesale for their membership wholesale business.  The redevelopment of this site into a shopping center has been proposed, as discussed below.  Of the remaining properties located in the Airport zone, most of the land is developed with airport related uses and utilized by the Airport Authority or its tenants.  The only area aside from the former Costco site that is Airport zoned and does not contain airport related uses is approximately 65 acres of land along Hollywood Way (the Adjacent Property and Airport-zoned portion of the Trust Property).  This land is currently vacant and its use is restricted through the 1999 Title Transfer Agreements executed between the City of Burbank and Airport Authority.  The Adjacent Property portion of the land is further restricted pursuant to the plan adopted by the City Council under Public Utilities Code Section 21661.6.

Project Description: The subject zone text amendment was applied for in conjunction with conditional use permit and development review applications to redevelop the former Costco site at 10950 Sherman Way.  The proposed project would convert the existing 143,716 square foot former Costco building into 1) a 45,000 square foot supermarket with alcohol sales (currently proposed to be a Vallarta market); 2) a 4,000 square foot self-service laundry facility; 3) a 40,000 square foot public storage or warehouse facility; and 4) 54,600 square feet of space for one or more to-be-determined retail, service commercial, and/or restaurant tenants.  The project would also involve the construction of two new structures in the existing surface parking area: a 2,500 square foot drive-through restaurant (currently proposed to be an El Pollo Loco) and a 20,000 square foot structure intended for multiple to-be-determined retail, service commercial, and/or restaurant tenants occupying about 1,000 to 2,000 square feet of space each (per the applicant, possible tenants include Subway restaurant, Cuban Bistro restaurant, AT&T Wireless, and a cigar shop).  The new commercial structure would be located along the Sherman Way frontage and the restaurant would be located immediately south fronting on Vineland Avenue.

Pursuant to the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC), a conditional use permit is required for restaurants and public storage facilities in the Airport zone.  A conditional use permit is further required for drive-through restaurants Citywide, and is required for the proposed supermarket to sell alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption.  Retail stores, including grocery markets, are currently prohibited in the Airport zone.  Similarly, other specific categories of retail and service commercial uses such as clothing stores, book stores, and beauty salons are prohibited in the Airport zone.  The applicant applied for a zone text amendment to change retail uses from prohibited to conditionally permitted in the Airport zone to allow the project to go forward (Exhibit B), and applied for a conditional use permit to allow such uses if the zone text amendment is adopted by the Council.[1]

Planning Board Consideration: The Planning Board held a public hearing to consider the redevelopment of the former Costco site and the associated zone text amendment on November 4, 2002.  The Board approved all aspects of the conditional use permit to allow the project to go forward as proposed, pending approval of the zone text amendment by the City Council (Exhibit C-1).  The Board also recommended approval of the zone text amendment.  Because the Board�s approval of the conditional use permit was not appealed and the City Council did not request to consider the item, the Board�s action is final.  Staff has described the proposed project herein and included copies of the project plans as exhibits to this report for the Council�s information (Exhibit C-2).  The conditional use permit approved by the Planning Board does not become effective, however, unless and until the City Council approves the subject zone text amendment and associated Negative Declaration.

Accordingly, Council action to approve the amendment is required to allow the project to go forward as proposed.  If the Council denies the subject application, retail and other commercial uses would continue to be prohibited in the Airport zone and the conditional use permit would not become effective.

Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO): On August 20, 2002, the City Council adopted an Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO) for certain development on and near the Airport requiring only ministerial approvals.  On October 4, 2002, the City Council extended the IDCO until August 19, 2004.  The subject zone text amendment and the associated development project are not subject to the IDCO because the actions cannot be approved as a ministerial matter.  The project requires discretionary approval through the conditional use permit and zone text amendment processes.  Staff further notes that the zone text amendment, although it affects the Airport zone, would not be subject to voter approval under Measure B because it does not involve the enlargement, expansion, or relocation of the Airport passenger terminal.

While the IDCO is in effect, staff is exploring potential changes to the development and use standards of the Airport zone at the direction of the City Council.  Staff does not anticipate that approval of the subject zone text amendment would conflict with any changes to be recommended through that process.  The Council�s consideration of this zone text amendment may be viewed as premature in light of the more comprehensive Code revisions now being considered by staff.  However, staff notes that this zone text amendment is the subject of an application filed by a project proponent, and the City is obligated to process the application in a timely manner.

Public Correspondence: In addition to newspaper publication, staff mailed public notices regarding the Planning Board hearing for the old Costco site project and subject zone text amendment to all property owners and tenants within a 1,000 foot radius of the project site in the City of Burbank and to all property owners within a 1,000 foot radius of the project site in the City of Los Angeles.  Staff also mailed a public notice to the City of Los Angeles Planning Department.  Staff received no comments regarding the proposed project.  Due to the proximity of the project site to the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, staff sent a letter to Airport Authority staff specifically requesting comments on the proposed project.  The Airport Authority�s comments specifically related to the zone text amendment are addressed below.  Staff published notice of the City Council zone text amendment hearing in the Burbank Leader newspaper.

ANALYSIS:

Staff-Proposed Modification to Zone Text Amendment: The applicant applied for a zone text amendment to change retail uses from prohibited to conditionally permitted in the Airport zone.  BMC Section 31-502 is the use list table that identifies all permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses in all non-residential zones throughout the City.  Although there is a separate use category for �retail store/sales,� there are numerous other use categories that cover various types of retail and service commercial uses that would be typically located in a shopping center.  Examples of such use categories include antique shop, beauty salon, book store, drug store, grocery/market, and pet shop.

Processing the applicant�s request to simply change the permitted status of retail stores in the Airport zone would not achieve the desired result, as numerous retail and service commercial uses that would likely locate in a shopping center would arguably be prohibited.  Rather than undertake a comprehensive review of the use list to determine which specific use categories should be conditionally permitted in the Airport zone, staff is recommending that a new use category of �shopping center� be added to the use list.[2]  Shopping centers would be permitted in most commercial zones in the City, consistent with the zones in which �retail store/sales� are permitted.

Staff notes a potential concern that certain specific retail or service commercial uses other than �retail store/sales� might be prohibited in a particular zone, and that the proposed zone text amendment might allow them by right as part of a shopping center.  As such, staff recommends that the permitted and conditionally permitted uses within a shopping center be the same as those of the zone in which the shopping center is located.  The exception to this general provision would be Airport zone, where the permitted and conditionally permitted uses would be those of the C-3 Commercial General Business zone.  Staff is concerned that changing the wide variety of retail and other commercial uses from prohibited to conditionally permitted in the Airport zone may promote the development of standalone and disjointed commercial uses.  Staff believes that unified shopping center developments would be better suited for the Airport zone and would better fulfill the purpose and intent of the Airport zone.  Because the C-3 zone is the dominant commercial zone in the City, staff believes that the zone�s permitted and conditionally permitted uses best represent the desired nature of commercial development in the Airport zone.

BMC Section 31-203 currently contains a definition of shopping center as follows:

�Shopping Center� means property designed to be leased to multiple tenants within a unified commercial retail project.

The term �shopping center� is not used in the use list, and is found only in the parking standards section of the Code to establish the parking standard of five spaces per 1,000 square feet of adjusted gross floor area for multiple tenant retail projects (or 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet for shopping centers less than once acre in size, known as �mini-malls�).  Staff proposes to revise the definition of �shopping center� to better reflect the current intent and practice of shopping center development.  The Planning Board voted to recommend minor modifications to the original definition proposed by staff to better identify the nature of the uses that would be found in a shopping center.  Staff agrees with the Board�s recommendation, and those changes have been incorporated into this proposed definition:

�Shopping center� means a unified complex with two or more retail, sales, service, and/or restaurant tenants sharing common on-site pedestrian and parking facilities, whether located on one or multiple lots or parcels and whether or not held under single ownership.  The permitted and conditionally permitted uses within a shopping center shall be the same as those of the zone in which the shopping center is located, except in the Airport zone where the permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the shopping center shall be those of the C-3 Commercial General Business zone.  A shopping center that is less than one acre in total net area is a �mini-mall.�  For the purposes of this definition, coffee stands, snack bars, or other businesses that are part of and incidental to larger retail businesses shall not be counted as separate tenants.

Following the Planning Board�s consideration of this amendment, staff added the final sentence regarding smaller uses that are incidental to larger uses to further clarify the intent of the definition.

Also following the Board�s review of the proposed amendment, staff further considered the potential impact of the proposed amendment on undeveloped portions of the Airport zone along Hollywood Way.  Staff recognizes the City Council�s previously stated concerns with regard to the potential for �big box� retail development on the Trust Property along Hollywood Way in the event that the property is sold for non-airport use.  Big box stores, similar to those found in the Empire Center development, often draw patrons from a regional area and result in traffic and other impacts beyond those of smaller shopping center developments.  Many cities across the nation have adopted ordinances to specifically regulate big box development differently from typical retail development.

Due to the proximity to the Airport, and existing and future Airport-generated traffic in the area, staff believes that a regional big box commercial center may not be an appropriate use for the Trust Property.  The traffic and other impacts of big box development may be incompatible with the nearby airport and create conflicts with airport traffic and users.  Most of the Trust Property is zoned M-2 General Industrial, where retail uses and shopping centers are now, and will continue to be, prohibited.  However, approximately 16 acres of the site are zoned Airport, and staff believes that this area may be adequate to construct one or more big box retailers in a shopping center arrangement.  Although a conditional use permit would be required for a shopping center on the Trust Property, staff believes that a better approach to controlling the possibility of such a use would be to prohibit it.  As such, staff is proposing that a new definition be created for �power centers,� or big box commercial centers, and added to the use list.  Power centers would be permitted in all commercial zones where shopping centers would be permitted (and as would already be allowed under the existing Code), but prohibited in the Airport zone, and defined as follows:

�Power center� means a �shopping center� with a combined total gross floor area of 200,000 square feet or more or with any single tenant with a total gross floor area of 60,000 square feet or more.

Because the proposed zone text amendment would add two new uses to the Citywide zoning use list, it would affect other zones in the City.  Pursuant to the existing Code, multiple tenant commercial shopping centers of any size are permitted in most commercial zones so long as the required parking can be provided.  To avoid having unintended impacts on existing and potential future shopping centers in commercial zones, staff proposes that the new shopping center and power center uses created by this zone text amendment be permitted by right in all commercial zones where retail uses are currently permitted.  This would cause the zone text amendment to have no impact on any zones in the City other than the Airport zone, where specific changes are intended.  Multiple tenant retail projects that are currently permitted as various individual uses would continue to be permitted under the new use categories to be created.  Current and future multiple tenant commercial development would be categorized differently in the Code, but the permitted status of such projects would not change.

Airport Authority Comments: Due to the proximity of the former Costco site to the Burbank Airport and the zone text amendment�s potential impact on the Airport zone, staff sent a letter to the Airport Authority seeking input on the proposed project.  The Airport Authority responded in a letter dated October 9, 2002 (Exhibit D).  Some of the Authority�s comments were directed specifically toward the development of the former Costco site, while others applied to the zone text amendment.  The Authority raised the following specific points in its letter.  Staff�s response to each of the Authority�s issues follows below:

1.   The underlying purpose of the Airport zone should be preserved.  No improvements should be allowed that would jeopardize the safe operation of the airport such as polluting or flammable operations.

The proposed zone text amendment would not conflict with the purpose of the Airport zone.  Further, the Burbank Municipal Code requires that specific findings be made in order to add a use to the use list.  These findings ensure that non-compatible uses would not be permitted in the Airport zone.  Because the zone text amendment would allow shopping center uses in the Airport zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit, any future projects would be individually reviewed for compatibility with the Airport zone and airport operations.

2.      The City should require the applicant to submit the proposed project to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review.  No structures should be placed within the Building Restriction Line (BRL).

The applicant has submitted the proposed project on the former Costco site to the FAA for review, and a proposed condition of approval would require the project to be modified so as not to constitute a hazard to air navigation as determined by the FAA pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 77.  Future projects developed pursuant to the zone text amendment would also be subject to review by the FAA.  The proposed project would not place any structures within the BRL, and any future projects would be closely examined to determine whether any proposed structures would be located within the BRL.  The City notes, however, that the Building Restriction Line does not apply to private development.

3.      The proposed project is subject to review by the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC).

As discussed below, the ALUC has reviewed the proposed development project and the proposed zone text amendment as required by state law, and found both actions to be consistent with the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan.

4.      Users of the proposed project may be exposed to excessive noise.  Sound insulation for every building should be required so as to limit interior noise to a maximum of 45dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).

The Noise Element of the General Plan indicates that the former Costco site and other sites affected by the proposed zone text amendment are located in an area with a day-night sound level (Ldn) of 65-75 decibels.  While the Burbank Municipal Code contains requirements for sound insulation of multiple family residential projects, there are no Code provisions for sound insulation of commercial projects.  Staff notes that many commercial and industrial areas of the City are exposed to noise levels equal to and greater than the affected properties as a result of aircraft, freeway, and city street noise.  Staff is not aware of any commercial or industrial project being required to provide sound insulation.  In the interest of consistency, staff does not believe that such a requirement should be placed upon projects developed pursuant to the proposed zone text amendment.  Staff further notes that the interior noise levels of commercial buildings are typically greater than those of residential buildings due to building equipment operations and employee and customer activity.  As such, the need for, and effectiveness of, sound insulation for commercial projects is not the same as multiple family residential projects.  Staff further notes that, according to the most recent Quarterly Noise Report the Airport Authority submitted to Caltrans (for the Fourth Quarter 2002), the structures on and proposed for the site are exposed to less than 65 dB CNEL.

5.      Improvements on the project site should be designed so as not to compromise the integrity of the airport security fencing.  Landscaped buffering should be provided near the fence and tall trees that would provide a means to scale the fence should not be placed near the fence.

The proposed project at the former Costco site would not make any modifications to, or otherwise directly impact, the airport security fencing.  The proposed site plan includes a landscaped buffer along the south property line adjacent to the fence, and a proposed condition of approval would prohibit the placement of trees along the security fence.  These issues would be closely examined with any future projects developed pursuant to the zone text amendment, and similar conditions would be imposed as necessary.

6.      The proposed zone text amendment should clarify that ancillary commercial uses associated with air passenger facilities are, and will continue to be, permitted in the Airport zone.

Retail, restaurant, and other commercial uses that are located within the air passenger terminal are considered incidental to the primary passenger terminal use.  Such uses are currently permitted as secondary and ancillary to the overall terminal use.  Their status would not be impacted by the proposed zone text amendment.

Staff also mailed a copy of the proposed Negative Declaration to the Airport Authority.  Staff did not receive any comments from the Authority regarding that document.

Airport Land Use Commission Consideration: California Public Utilities Code Section 21676 requires a local agency to submit any proposed General Plan, specific plan, or zoning code amendment that would affect land located within an airport planning boundary to the County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a determination of consistency with the County Airport Land Use Plan.  Pursuant to the 1991 Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan, the former Costco site and other areas of the Airport zone are within the planning boundary.  Because the zone text amendment would change the list of permitted uses in the Airport zone, Commission review is required.

City staff, along with staff from the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning, determined that the Planning Board should consider the proposed zone text amendment prior to its being considered by the Airport Land Use Commission.  As such, staff filed an application with ALUC in December 2002 following the Board�s approval of the proposed project and zone text amendment.  Public notice of the ALUC hearing was provided in the Burbank Leader newspaper and the public hearing was held on March 26, 2003.  Aside from City staff, there were no public speakers at the hearing, and County staff indicated that no correspondence or comments were received regarding the application.

The ALUC voted unanimously to determine that the proposed development of the former Costco site and the proposed zone text amendment are compatible with the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan.  Prior to rendering its decision, the ALUC members expressed several concerns that they asked be forwarded to the City Council for consideration.  These concerns are specifically related to the project on the former Costco site but also have implications for future projects developed pursuant to the zone text amendment.  Staff notes that these concerns are not conditions of approval and are not items requiring any Council action, but are rather informational items that ALUC members requested be passed on to the Council.  Staff�s response to each of these concerns follows below:

1.      The City should consider interior noise levels in commercial buildings around the airport and the potential need for sound insulation, especially with regard to restaurants.

As discussed above in response to the Airport Authority�s comment, staff does not believe that requiring sound insulation for the project on the former Costco site or other potential commercial projects around the Airport would be appropriate or consistent with requirements elsewhere in the City.  While staff supports and requires sound insulation for multifamily residential projects, staff does not believe that insulation is necessary for commercial shopping center projects.

2.      The City should require all warning lights to be placed on buildings as required by the FAA.

As discussed above in response to the Airport Authority�s comment, the proposed project on the former Costco site has a condition of approval requiring FAA review of the project.  Any future projects developed pursuant to the zone text amendment would also be conditioned as such.  Any recommendations from the FAA regarding the placement of warning lights or other hazard mitigation measures would be followed for this and future projects.

3.      The City should consider the possibility of hazardous materials, weapons, or other such items being stored in a public storage facility in proximity to the Airport.

Staff first notes that public storage facilities are already permitted in the Airport zone with a conditional use permit and that the subject zone text amendment would not alter the existing Code with regard to such facilities.  Staff does not disagree with this concern expressed by some ALUC members.  However, staff believes that the potential for hazardous materials, weapons, or other such items to be placed in a public storage facility by members of the public does not pose any greater danger than similar materials that could otherwise be located in proximity to the Airport.  The Burbank Airport is surrounded by a fully developed, urbanized area and located in close proximity to public rights of way, structures, parking areas, and other facilities that are accessible by the general public.  Potentially hazardous items could be located in vehicles in parking areas or on public rights of way, or in structures near the Airport, and staff does not believe that public storage facilities pose a specific danger to any greater extent than other nearby uses.  Specifically with regard to the former Costco project, staff notes that the property is approximately two-thirds of a mile from the FAA control tower and approximately three-fourths of a mile from the passenger terminal.  As such, any potential incident at the property is not as likely to directly impact the Airport facilities.  Staff further notes that the Airport Authority did not express any concerns in this regard related to the public storage facility.

In finding the zone text amendment consistent with the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan, the ALUC stated that the finding is subject to the condition that the ALUC review all future proposed commercial uses within the Airport zone.  ALUC staff has explained that this condition was included because the City of Burbank General Plan has never been reviewed by ALUC for consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan and the ALUC wishes, therefore, to review each commercial project within the Airport zone until the General Plan is reviewed and determined to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.

Staff notes first that as part of staff�s review of the Airport zone to create development and use standards for Airport development, staff is reviewing the General Plan and will likely be recommending amendments to certain aspects thereof.  At such time that the zoning and General Plan amendments are complete, staff will seek a determination from ALUC that the City�s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and any proposed amendments thereto are compatible with the Airport Land Use Plan. 

Furthermore, staff does not believe that the ALUC has the legal authority to require review of all commercial projects proposed in the Airport zone.  Accordingly, staff does not believe that the ALUC�s position regarding review of future projects is binding on the City.  Staff will recommend that applicants for conditional use permits and other discretionary approvals for commercial projects in the Airport zone seek ALUC approval until the ALUC has reviewed the City�s General Plan.

Airport Zone Purpose and Compatibility: BMC Section 31-901 states that the Airport zone is intended �for the protection of the airport from uses that might restrict or inhibit its principal function as an air terminal facility.�

Staff does not believe that the proposed zone text amendment would significantly impact development or uses in the Airport zone or be inconsistent with airport operations.  No shopping center or other development would be allowed by right under the proposed amendment.  As such, the zone text amendment in and of itself would not allow for any development that would potentially be in conflict with the intent of the Airport zone.  Through the conditional use permit process, the City, including the Planning Board, would have the authority to review each proposed shopping center development on a case-by-case basis to determine compatibility with surrounding airport development.  Further, a variety of industrial and commercial uses are currently conditionally permitted in the Airport zone, including wholesale sales, restaurants, and retail sales when the products being sold are manufactured on the premises.  The proposed zone text amendment would conditionally permit uses that are similar in nature to uses already conditionally permitted.

Approximately 436 acres of land are zoned Airport in the City of Burbank.  Of that land, only the 11.4 acres of the former Costco site are not owned by, or for the benefit of, the Airport Authority.  Accordingly, the Airport Authority itself is in a position to ensure that future shopping center uses in the Airport zone are compatible with Airport operations.

Further, staff believes that the proposed zone text amendment would promote better planning by forcing potential developers to comprehensively plan a multiple tenant commercial project rather than proceeding with disjointed individual retail uses that would remain prohibited in the Airport zone.  This is especially important given the large and undivided expanses of land in the Airport zone that would potentially be developed pursuant to the proposed zone text amendment.  Such development would also help to ensure that impacts to airport operations are avoided by allowing the City to consider all components of a proposed development and their potential resulting impacts at once under a single application rather than under multiple applications for individual commercial uses.  The additional controls on such development pursuant to the �power center� definition would ensure that a large regional shopping center that would have a greater potential for incompatibility with the Airport would be not be developed.

In the event that any additional development were proposed pursuant to the proposed zone text amendment, it would likely be situated similarly to the subject project and would not interfere with any airport operations or the Airport�s ability to function as an air passenger facility.  Again, however, because the proposed amendment would require granting of a conditional use permit prior to the development of any shopping center uses, the City would have the opportunity to make a compatibility determination for each individual project.

General Plan Consistency: Much like the purpose of the Airport zone, the General Plan Land Use Element states that the Airport land use designation is intended to provide land for airport facilities and �protect the airport from uses that might restrict or inhibit its primary function as an air terminal facility.�  The General Plan�s policies for the Airport land use designation are specifically related to airport facilities and do not address non-airport development.  Staff believes that allowing shopping center uses in the Airport zone would not inhibit the Airport�s primary function nor conflict with any other General Plan goal or policy.  As such, the proposed zone text amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

Surrounding Zones and Properties: The Airport zone includes and is surrounded by properties zoned for and developed with airport, commercial, and industrial uses.  There are no residentially zoned properties abutting or adjacent to the Airport zone.  Some residential properties are located in the vicinity of the Airport zone in the Cities of Burbank and Los Angeles.  However, such properties are abutting or adjacent to commercially or industrially zoned property and are already impacted by those uses and/or the Airport itself.  Allowing shopping center uses in the Airport zone subject to approval of a conditional use permit would not affect the residential properties.  Further, the presence of shopping center uses in the Airport zone would have no general impacts on surrounding commercial or industrial properties.  Such uses would be in character and generally compatible with surrounding development.  As occurred with the project on the former Costco site, localized traffic or other impacts resulting from specific projects would be analyzed on a case-by-case basis if and when any application was submitted.

Department Comments: No City departments of divisions submitted any comments regarding the proposed zone text amendment or expressed any opposition thereto.

Environmental Review: Staff prepared an Initial Study for the proposed zone text amendment in conjunction with the proposed project on the former Costco site pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  The Initial Study found that the proposed project would not have any significant environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration was accordingly prepared and released for public comment (Exhibits E-1 and E-2).  The public review period started on October 14, 2002 and ended on November 4, 2002.  Staff received no comments regarding the Negative Declaration.  Because the nature of the zone text amendment has changed slightly since the Negative Declaration was prepared, staff has prepared an attachment to amend the project description included in the CEQA document (Exhibit E-3).  Staff notes that the potential environmental impacts of the proposed zone text amendment are unaffected and the findings of the Negative Declaration are unchanged.

CONCLUSION:

It is staff's assessment that the nine findings required to add a use to a list of permitted uses pursuant to BMC Section 31-1991 can be made for the proposed zone text amendment.

REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDING A USE TO A LIST OF PERMITTED USES:

(1)                The addition of the use will be in accord with the purposes of the zone in which it is proposed to be listed.

The purpose of the Airport zone, in which shopping centers would be conditionally permitted and power centers would be prohibited, is to protect the Airport from uses that would inhibit its function as an air terminal.  A properly located and conditioned shopping center use would not inhibit the air terminal functions of the Airport.  The commercial zones in which shopping centers and power centers would be permitted are intended to accommodate a variety of commercial uses throughout the City.  The shopping center and power center uses would be consistent with that purpose.

(2)                The proposed use is compatible with and has the same basic characteristics as the other permitted uses.

Wholesale sales, retail sales incidental to manufacturing, and a variety of other commercial and industrial uses are conditionally permitted in the Airport zone.  The proposed shopping center use would be compatible with, and have similar characteristics to, the other conditionally permitted uses.  The commercial zones in which shopping centers and power centers would be permitted have a variety of retail and service commercial uses as permitted uses.  Such uses have the same characteristics as a shopping center and power center and would be compatible with a shopping center or power center use.

(3)                The proposed use can be expected to conform with the required conditions for the zone.

The Airport zone has no applicable development standards.  The proposed project at the former Costco site would comply with all development standards of the C-3 Commercial General Business zone, demonstrating that the proposed use would be able to comply with the development standards of the respective commercial zones in which they would be permitted.  Projects that would fit the proposed shopping center and power center definitions exist in the City today and comply with the applicable zoning standards.

(4)                The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.

Projects that would fit the proposed shopping center and power center definitions exist in commercial zones throughout the City today and are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.  Allowing the proposed use in the Airport zone with a conditional use permit would allow each proposed project to be reviewed individually and conditioned appropriately so as to ensure that there would be no impacts on the public health, safety, or welfare.

(5)                The proposed use will not adversely affect the character of the zone.

The Airport zone is intended primarily for airport related facilities and operations.  A wholesale business that functioned similar to a retail store and a variety of industrial uses were formerly located in the Airport zone and did not affect the character of the zone.  Shopping center uses allowed by conditional use permit would not affect the character of Airport zone.  Commercial zones currently allow by right a variety of commercial uses that are identical to those that would be found in a shopping center or power center, and the character of such zones would not be affected.

(6)                The proposed use will not create more vehicular or other traffic than the volume normally created by any of the uses permitted.

The proposed shopping center use would create less traffic than a similarly sized wholesale use that is conditionally permitted in the Airport zone.  Existing individual commercial uses and developments that would fit the proposed shopping center and power center definitions are located in commercial zones and produce similar amounts of traffic as would the proposed uses.

(7)                The proposed use will not create more odor, dust, dirt, smoke, noise, vibration, illumination, glare, unsightliness, or any other objectionable influence than the amount, if any, normally created by any of the permitted uses.

A variety of industrial uses that produce numerous objectionable impacts are currently conditionally permitted in the Airport zone.  The proposed shopping center use would be far less noxious in nature and would have fewer objectionable impacts.  The shopping center and power center uses are similar to commercial uses already permitted in commercial zones, and would have similar impacts without producing any additional objectionable impacts.

(8)                The proposed use will not create any greater hazard of fire or explosion than the hazards normally created by any of the permitted uses.

A variety of industrial uses with a hazard of fire or explosion are currently conditionally permitted in the Airport zone.  The proposed shopping center use would have a relatively low hazard of fire or explosion.  The shopping center and power center uses would have the same low hazard of fire or explosion as other commercial uses currently permitted by right in commercial zones.

(9)                The proposed use will not cause substantial injury to the values of property in the zone in which it is proposed to be listed or in any abutting zone.

The proposed shopping center use may increase property values in the Airport zone by allowing another option for development and by allowing a use with fewer environmental impacts than an airport related use to locate in the zone.  The shopping center and power center uses are similar to other commercial uses already permitted in the commercial zones and would have no impact on property values in those zones.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving Zone Text Amendment No. 2002-1 as described in this report and adopt a resolution approving the Negative Declaration related thereto.  The proposed ordinance would:

1.      Amend BMC Section 31-203 by amending the definition of �shopping center� and adding a new definition of �power center�

2.      Amend BMC Section 31-502 by adding the new use category of �shopping center� which would be permitted with a conditional use permit in the Airport zone and permitted by right in all zones where retail uses are currently permitted

3.      Amend BMC Section 31-502 by adding the new use category of �power center� which would be prohibited in the Airport zone and permitted by right in all zones where retail uses are currently permitted

LIST OF EXHIBITS:

Exhibit   A-1      Zoning/Public Noticing/Fair Political Practices Act Compliance Map of the Airport zone

               A-2      Notice of Public Hearing

 Exhibit  B         Zone text amendment application

 Exhibit  C-1     Planning Board Resolution No. 2881 adopted November 4, 2002

               C-2     Project Plans for proposed development of former Costco site

 Exhibit   D       Airport Authority comments dated October 9, 2002

 Exhibit   E-1    Public Notice of Environmental Decision

                E-2    Proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study

                E-3   Attachment to Negative Declaration

go to the top