HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-18-2017 Agenda Packet2Tuesday, July 18, 2017
2:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo Page 1
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Heidi Harmon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy
Pease, Vice Mayor Dan Rivoire and Mayor Heidi Harmon
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6
Agency Negotiators: Monica Irons, Nickole Sutter, Rick Bolanos
Represented Employee
Organizations: San Luis Obispo City Employee’s Association (SLOCEA)
San Luis Obispo Police Officer’s Association (POA)
San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officer’s Association (SLOPSOA)
International Association of Firefighters Local 3523
Unrepresented Employees: Unrepresented Management Employees
Unrepresented Confidential Employees
B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 54956.9; Name of case: Erik Baskin,
et al. v. City of San Luis Obispo; United States District Court, Central District of California
Case No. 2:16-cv-08876-DSF-JPR
Packet Pg. 1
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 2
C. CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8
Property: 1625 Calle Joaquin, APN 053-171-033 and 053-171-034
Agency Negotiators: Katie Lichtig, Christine Dietrick, Carrie Mattingly, Michael
Codron, Jon Ansolabehere, Dave Hix, Aaron Floyd, Jennifer
Metz, Cathy Springford
Negotiating Parties: G6 Hospitality Property LLC
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2017 TO BEGIN AT 4:00
PM.
Packet Pg. 2
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 3
4:00 PM
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Heidi Harmon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy
Pease, Vice Mayor Dan Rivoire and Mayor Heidi Harmon
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
1. REINTRODUCTION OF PARKING METER RATE ORDINANCE AND PARKING
STRUCTURE RATE RESOLUTION (GRIGSBY/LEE – 10 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
1. Rescind and Replace Resolution 10807 in its entirety, and adopt a Resolution entitled,
“A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving
Parking Fees in the City’s Parking Structures, Monthly and Quarterly Permit Fees for
Parking Lots and Meters, Validation Discount Rate, and Fees for Residential Ten-Hour
Meter Permits and Residential Parking Permits” effective January 1, 2018 and July 1,
2020; and
2. Re-introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, amending Section 10.52.010 (Parking Meter Zone Rates)
of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code” approving an increase in parking rates for
metered spaces effective January 1, 2018, July 1, 2019 and again on July 1, 2020.
STUDY SESSION
2. WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STRUCTURE REVIEW
(MATTINGLY/FLOYD/HIX/METZ – 60 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
Participate in the first of four water and wastewater rate structure study sessions with HDR
Engineering, Inc.
ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2017 TO BEGIN AT 6:00
PM.
Packet Pg. 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 4
6:00 PM
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Heidi Harmon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy
Pease, Vice Mayor Dan Rivoire and Mayor Heidi Harmon
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Carlyn Christianson
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15
minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip
and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council
on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the
Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the
Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons
exercising their public testimony rights (gov. Code sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to
follow up on such items.
APPOINTMENTS
3. APPOINTMENT TO THE TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
(TBID) AND BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BAC) (GALLAGHER
/GOODWIN – 5 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
In accordance with the recommendations of the Council Subcommittees:
1. Confirm the appointment of Bruce Skidmore to the Tourism Business Improvement
District to complete an unexpired term through March 31, 2021; and
2. Confirm the appointment of Timothy Jouet to the Bicycle Advisory Committee to
complete an unexpired term through March 31, 2019; and
3. Confirm the appointment of Layla Lopez to the Bicycle Advisory Committee to
complete an unexpired term through March 31, 2018.
Packet Pg. 4
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 5
CONSENT AGENDA
A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items
shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses
another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three minute time limit.
4. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Recommendation:
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
5. MINUTES OF MAY 16, 2017, JUNE 1, 2017 AND JUNE 20, 2017 (GALLAGHER)
Recommendation:
Approve minutes of the May 16, 2017, June 1, 2017 and June 20, 2017 City Council
meetings.
6. ADOPTION OF A RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND CC SOCCER CORPORATION
(STANWYCK/MUDGETT)
Recommendation:
As recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission, adopt a Recreation Partnership
Agreement between the City and CC Soccer Corporation (CCS) to provide an Adult
Recreational Soccer Program.
7. SELECTION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES - LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE (GALLAGHER)
Recommendation:
Appoint Mayor Heidi Harmon as the voting delegate and Council Members Pease and
Gomez as alternate voting delegates to vote on the City’s behalf at the Annual Business
Meeting of the League of California Cities on Friday, September 15, 2017.
Packet Pg. 5
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 6
8. VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT SURPLUS DESIGNATION AND AUTHORIZATION
OF SALE (GRIGSBY/BOCHUM/SHUCK)
Recommendation:
Authorize the surplus designation and disposal of surplus units in accordance with the City’s
policies and procedures as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Sections 405-L,
480-A and 480-B.
9. ESRI ENTERPRISE LICENSE AGREEMENT EXTENSION
(JOHNSON/SCHMIDT/YUN)
Recommendation:
Approve an agreement with Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Inc. for a three-
year Small Government Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) in the amount of $105,000
payable on an annual basis at $35,000 per year.
10. AUTHORIZE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR LICENSE PLATE
RECOGNITION (LPR), SPECIFICATION NO 91547 (GRIGSBY/LEE)
Recommendation:
1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for License Plate Recognition
System (LPR), Specification No. 91547; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with the successful bidder within
authorized project budget not to exceed $145,000, and
3. Authorize the City Attorney to approve modifications to the form of the contract with
the successful bidder.
11. ENTERPRISE STORAGE UPGRADE (JOHNSON/SCHMIDT/GUARDADO)
Recommendation:
1. Award a contract and authorize a purchase order for Connection (formally
GovConnection). in the amount of $299,972 for the upgrade and installation of the City’s
Enterprise Storage System (the Compellent storage solution) and three years of 24/7
support; and
2. Waive formal bids and authorize use of Dell WSCA/NASPO Contract#: MNWNC-108
to procure this purchase from Connection (formally GovConnection) as allowed under
3.24.060 E. of the City of San Luis Obispo Muncipal Code.
Packet Pg. 6
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 7
12. MARGARITA LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91214A
(MATTINGLY/HIX/METZ)
Recommendation:
1. Approve plans and specifications for the Margarita Lift Station Replacement,
Specification No. 91214A and authorize staff to advertise for bids; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest respons ible bid is within
the Engineer's estimate of $903,000.
13. 2017-19 DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT (D. JOHNSON/L. JOHNSON)
Recommendation:
Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a two-year agreement with the San Luis
Obispo Downtown Association (SLODA) for use of funds collected through the Downtown
Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment with no changes other than the term of
the agreement and a new provision requiring SLODA to obtain an encroachment permit for
Farmer’s Market.
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
Packet Pg. 7
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 8
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - The following public hearing was concluded and the
item continued from the rescheduled regular City Council meeting of July 5, 2017. Further
public testimony will be taken only to address new material presented between the conclusion
of the July 5th meeting and the continued Council deliberation on this matter on July 18, 2017.
14. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT,
INCLUDING 1) RELATED ENTITLEMENTS AND 2) THE CERTIFICATION OF
THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR). PROJECT
ENTITLEMENTS INCLUDE: 1) SPECIFIC PLAN, 2) GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, 3) VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND 4) INITIATION OF
ANNEXATION FOR THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING REVIEW OF A TERM
SHEET AS THE BASIS FOR A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE SITE INCLUDE UP TO 580 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS; 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT; 150,000
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE DEVELOPMENT; A 200-ROOM HOTEL; AND
APPROXIMATELY 60.4 ACRES OF THE SITE TO REMAIN FOR
AGRICULTURE AND OPEN-SPACE. (JOHNSON/CODRON/HUDSON/LEVEILLE –
120 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of
the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, certifying the final EIR for and
approving the San Luis Ranch Project, including a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment,
Prezoning, Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096, initiation of
annexation for the project, and term sheet for property located at 1035 Madonna Road
(SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015).”
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
15. ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION - REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL
CODE TITLE 17: ZONING REGULATIONS, ASSOCIATED WITH
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH AN EXEMPTION FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CODRON/DAVIDSON – 20 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Amending Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code
associated with Development Agreements with an Exemption from Environmental Review
(Code-0107-2017)”.
Packet Pg. 8
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 9
16. MODIFICATION OF CORPORATION YARD WELL PERMIT FEE AND ACCESS
(MATTINGLY/FLOYD/BOERMAN – 30 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, amending the City’s Permit Fee and User Regulations for the Use of the
Corporation Yard Non-Potable Well” amending Resolution No. 10629 (2015 Series) to:
1. Restrict public access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well to outside-City
properties on O’Connor Way, West Foothill Boulevard, and neighboring areas for non-
potable use only; and
2. Update permit fee for access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well; and
3. Terminate public access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well on July 1, 2018.
LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
(Not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities.
At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification,
make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to
Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for
factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting
concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future
agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2)
ADJOURNMENT
The Regular City Council Meeting of August 1, 2017 was previously cancelled. The next Regular
City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 4:00 p.m., and 6:00 p.m., in
the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
Packet Pg. 9
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda July 18, 2017 Page 10
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see City Clerk.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City
Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related
writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the
City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal
business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning
any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100.
Packet Pg. 10
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Scott Lee, Parking Services Manager
SUBJECT: REINTRODUCTION OF PARKING METER RATE ORDINANCE AND
PARKING STRUCTURE RATE RESOLUTION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Rescind and Replace Resolution 10807 in its entirety, and adopt a Resolution (Attachment A)
approving modifications to parking rates in the parking structures effective January 1, 2018
and July 1, 2020; and
2. Re-introduce an Ordinance (Attachment B) approving an increase in parking rates for
metered spaces effective January 1, 2018, July 1, 2019 and again on July 1, 2020.
Proposed Revisions to Parking Meter Rates and Parking Structure Rates
On June 6, 2017 a presentation was made as part of the 2017-19 Parking Services Financial Plan
Budget. The City Council moved forward with a unanimous approval of the resolutions and
ordinance. These included the multi-year rate increases for metered locations and the parking
structures for hourly rates, permits, and proxcards.
Upon review, however, it was discovered that one of the resolutions and the ordinance were not
consistent with the recommendations. Specifically, they did not confirm the effective dates, or
the specific categories proposed for increase, and when the proposed rate increases would occur.
Therefore, this corrected resolution is presented for adoption and the ordinance is being
reintroduced. Corrected copies of each are attached. The previously approved resolution is also
attached for reference only.
CONCURRENCES
The Downtown SLO Parking and Access Committee (May 11, 2017).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Reintroducing an ordinance to adopt parking rates is not an action that has the potential to cause
a significant effect on the environmental and therefore is exempt under 15061 B (3) of the
California Environmental Quality Act as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility
that the proposed rate changes will have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
On June 6, 2017 a detailed analysis of the Parking Fund revenues, expenditures, and changes in
financial position. This action is consistent with the Council conceptual approval of the Parking
Packet Pg. 11
1
Fund analysis on June 6th and approved 2017-19 Financial Plan on June 20, 2017. The 2017
Parking Fund Analysis includes the key assumptions used in preparing Fund projections. With
the proposed rate and fine increases, the analysis presented to Council in that report, demonstrate
sufficient funds to support operations, capital projects, and debt service needs of the Parking
Fund including the CIP projects yet to be specifically identified.
ALTERNATIVES
Council, at its discretion, can adopt all or part of the requested rate increases presented in this
report.
Attachments:
a - Resolution - Parking Structure Rates - 2017- revised
b - Ordinance - Meter Rates - 2017- revised
c - Resolution 10807 (2017 Series) - Parking Structure Rates - 2017 (original)
Packet Pg. 12
1
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARKING FEES IN
THE CITY’S PARKING STRUCTURES, MONTHLY AND
QUARTERLY PERMIT FEES FOR PARKING LOTS AND METERS,
VALIDATION DISCOUNT RATE, AND FEES FOR RESIDENTIAL
TEN-HOUR METER PERMITS AND RESIDENTIAL PARKING
PERMITS.
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo wishes to maintain effective usage of its three
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide secure and user friendly parking for all users of
the parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the Parking Revenue Enhancements staff report and
held a public meeting on the proposed changes to the parking structure rates and hours of operation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Effective January 1, 2018, all hourly parking structure rates shall increase
to $1.25 an hour, including Sundays, with the first hour free.
SECTION 2. Effective January 1, 2018, the maximum daily parking structure rate shall
increase to $12.50 per day, Monday through Saturday and $6.25 per day on Sundays.
SECTION 3. Effective July 1, 2020, the hourly parking structure rates in the 842 Palm,
919 Palm and Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $1.50 an hour, including Sundays, with the
first hour free.
SECTION 4. Effective July 1, 2020, the maximum daily parking structure rate in the 842
Palm, 919 Palm and the Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $15.00 per day, Monday through
Saturday and $7.50 per day on Sundays.
SECTION 5. Upon the opening of the new Palm Nipomo Parking Structure, the hourly
rate shall be $1.00 an hour, including Sundays, with the first hour free.
SECTION 6. Upon the opening of the new Palm Nipomo Parking Structure, the
maximum daily parking structure rate shall be $10.00 per day, Monday through Saturday and $5.00
per day on Sundays.
Packet Pg. 13
1
Resolution No. ______ (2017 Series) Page 2
R ______
SECTION 7. Effective January 1, 2018, the monthly fee for proximity cards (Proxcards)
for the 842 Palm Street, 919 Palm Street and 871 Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $255.00
per quarter and the Downtown Residential Overnight Program (DROP) shall increase to $375.00
per quarter.
SECTION 8. Effective July 1, 2020, the monthly fee for proximity cards (Proxcards) for
the 842 Palm Street, 919 Palm Street and 871 Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $285.00
per quarter and the Downtown Residential Overnight Program (DROP) shall increase to $435.00
per quarter.
SECTION 9. Effective January 1, 2018, the ten-hour meter permit fee shall increase to
$60.00 for the monthly permit and increase to $180 for the quarterly permit.
SECTION 10. Effective July 1, 2019, the ten-hour meter permit fee shall increase to
$80.00 for the monthly permit and increase to $240 for the quarterly permit.
SECTION 11. Effective July 1, 2020, the ten-hour meter permit fee shall increase to
$90.00 for the monthly permit and increase to $270 for the quarterly permit.
SECTION 12. Upon the opening of the new Palm Nipomo Parking Structure the monthly
fee for proximity cards (Proxcards) shall be $225 .00 per quarter and the Downtown Residential
Overnight Program (DROP)shall be $375 per quarter.
SECTION 13. Effective January 1, 2018, the fee for Residential Ten-Hour Meter Permits
and Residential Parking Permits shall increase to $15.00 annually.
SECTION 14. Effective July 1, 2020, the fee for Residential Ten-Hour Meter Permits and
Residential Parking Permits shall increase to $20.00 annually.
SECTION 15. Effective January 1, 2018, the discount rate for validation tokens and
stickers shall be established at a forty (40%) discount to the current hourly parking structure rate
for 919 Palm Street.
Upon motion of ___________________, seconded by_____________________ and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this ____ day of ___________, 2017.
_______________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
Packet Pg. 14
1
Resolution No. ______ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 15
1
O ______
ORDINANCE NO. ______ (2017 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 10.52.010
(PARKING METER ZONE RATES) OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, State law provides, in Vehicle Code Section 22508, that cities must
establish parking meter rates by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to continue to financially support the operation an d debt
service of the next City parking structure; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the staff report and considered the proposed changes
to the parking meter rates at a public meeting on June 6, 2017.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 10.52.010 (Parking meter zone – rates) of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
10.52.010 Parking meter zone – Rates.
A. Within the area enclosed by a solid line on the parking rate zone map (Exhibit A) and the
area enclosed by the shaded line on Slack Street parking meter zone map (Exhibit B) (more
particularly described as: the north side of Hathway Avenue adjacent to Cal Poly to Longview
Lane, the east side of Longview Street from Hathway Avenue to Slack Street, the north side of
Slack Street from Longview Lane to Grand Avenue, and the south side of Slack Street adjacent to
the San Luis Coastal Unified School District parcel from the midblock point of Slack Street
(between Longview Lane and Grand Avenue) to Grand Avenue), the parking of vehicles on streets
or in municipal parking lots may be controlled and regulated with the aid of parking meters.
B. Unless established otherwise below, the parking meter rate on streets or in municipal
parking lots in the lower rate zone shall be seventy-five cents one dollar per hour effective January
1, 2018 and these parking meter rates shall increase to one dollar and twenty-five cents per hour
effective July 1, 2020.
C. Within the area designated on the parking rate zones map (Exhibit A) the rate for parking
meters on streets or in municipal parking lots shall be one dollar and twenty five fifty cents per
hour effective January 1, 2018 and these parking meter rates shall increase to one dollar and
seventy-five cents per hour effective July 1, 2020.
Packet Pg. 16
1
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
O ______
D. Within the area designated on the parking rate zones map (Exhibit A), the rate for parking
meters on streets or in municipal lots shall be one dollar and fifty seventy-five cents per hour
effective January 1, 2018 and these parking meter rates shall increase to two dollars per hour
effective July 1, 2020.
E. Within the shaded area of the map entitled Slack Street parking meter zone map (Exhibit
B) the parking of vehicles on streets may be controlled and regulated with the aid of parking
meters. The parking meter rate shall be seventy-five cents one dollar per hour if controller by
meter.
SECTION 2. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of
this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It
is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of
the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared
invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 3. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of the Council
members voting for and against it, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage,
in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance will
go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the 18th day of July 2017, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the 15th of August 2017, on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
_______________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST
_____________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 17
1
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
O ______
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
_____________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 18
1
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
O ______
Packet Pg. 191
Ordinance No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 5
O ______
Packet Pg. 201
R 10807
RESOLUTION NO. 10807 (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARKING FEES IN THE CITY’S
PARKING STRUCTURES
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo wishes to maintain effective usage of its three parking
structures; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide secure and user friendly parking for all users of the
parking structures; and
WHEREAS, the parking program needs to continue to be self-sufficient for its financial
commitments; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the Parking Revenue Enhancements staff report and held a
public meeting on the proposed changes to the parking structure rates and hours of operation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as
follows:
SECTION 1. Effective January 1, 2018, all hourly parking structure rates shall increase to $1.25
an hour, including Sundays, with the first hour free.
SECTION 2. Effective January 1, 2018, the maximum daily parking structure rate shall increase
to $12.50 per day, Monday through Saturday and $6.25 per day on Sundays.
SECTION 3. Effective July 1, 2020, the hourly parking structure rates in the 842 Palm, 919
Palm and Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $1.50 an hour, including Sundays, with the first hour
free.
SECTION 4. Effective July 1, 2020, the maximum daily parking structure rate in the 842 Palm,
919 Palm and the Marsh Street Structures shall increase to $15.00 per day, Monday through Saturday
and $7.50 per day on Sundays.
SECTION 5. Upon the opening of the new Palm Nipomo Parking Structure, the hourly rate
shall be $1.00 an hour, including Sundays, with the first hour free.
SECTION 6. Upon the opening of the new Palm Nipomo Parking Structure, the maximum daily
parking structure rate shall be $10.00 per day, Monday through Saturday and $5.00 per day on Sundays.
Packet Pg. 21
1
Resolution No. 10807 (2017 Series) Page 2
R 10807
Upon motion of Council Member Gomez, seconded by Council Member Christianson and on
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Christianson, Gomez, Pease
Vice Mayor Rivoire and Mayor Harmon
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 6th day of June, 2017.
/s/ Heidi Harmon________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST
/s/ Carrie Gallagher______________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ J. Christine Dietrick______________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, this 7th day of June, 2017.
/s/ Carrie Gallagher____________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 22
1
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Jennifer Metz, Utilities Project Manager
SUBJECT: WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STRUCTURE REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
Participate in the first of four water and wastewater rate structure study sessions with HDR
Engineering, Inc.
DISCUSSION
Background
The City’s Water and Sewer Funds are enterprise funds separate from the City’s General Fund
with each fund’s operating, capital, and debt service expenditures are covered by rates and fees
paid for the services provided to San Luis Obispo customers. The Water Fund is comprised of
five programs that support the different elements involved in providing water service. The Sewer
Fund is comprised of five operating programs that support the different tasks required to provide
services that are highly regulated by state and federal mandates. In 2017, the Water Fund collects
revenue from approximately 15,100 accounts to cover the cost for water services. operation, and
infrastructure. Similarly, the Sewer Fund collects revenue from approximately 14,500 accounts
to provide wastewater service, operation, and infrastructure.
The City experienced a significant decline in water and wastewater revenue when the
community’s water conservation efforts reduced consumption under State-mandated drought
restrictions in place from 2015 into 2017. Though drought restrictions were rescinded by the City
Council on June 20, resource protection and water conservation continues to remain a way of
life. This water consumption pattern creates volatility under the current rate structures, which
secure up to 87 percent of revenue through volumetric rates. The City must critically re-examine
how to attain revenue stability in support of the provision of water and wastewater services now
and into the future. If left unaddressed, the decrease in revenues will lead to structural deficits
impacting the City’s ability to sufficiently fund operating costs, current and future capital
improvement needs, maintain required coverage ratios for favorable debt financing, and
mandated reserve levels.
The City last reviewed its water rate structure in 2015 when a three-year increase to the base fee
and drought surcharges were added to both the base fee and the volumetric charge. This
surcharge was subsequently removed from the base fee in March 2017 and the volumetric charge
in July 2017. Prior to that, the water rate structure was modified in 2013 when a base fee was
added, a third volumetric tier was eliminated, and the number of units on the first tier of usa ge
was changed from five to eight.
Minor modifications were made to the wastewater rate structure in 2014 when the school
category was eliminated and changed to non-residential. The wastewater rate structure was last
Packet Pg. 23
2
comprehensively reviewed in 2007 when the City went to a volume-based residential rate
structure. Commercial customers have historically been on a volume-based wastewater rate
structure.
The City’s current water rate structure includes a base account fee and a unit rate charged on the
volume of water used. The City applies a two-tier rate structure with water usage over eight units
charged at a higher rate than the first eight units. The City’s wastewater rate is likewise
composed of a base rate and unit rate charged on the ratepayer’s water consumption. The
wastewater charges for residential ratepayers are capped based on a three-month average winter
water consumption; new customers are assigned a charge based on a historical, system -wide
average winter water consumption (eight units).
Rate Structure Review Scope
The water and wastewater rate structure study sessions will be guided by HDR Engineering, Inc.
(HDR). The outcome of the study sessions will be a recommended water and wastewater rate
structure which will meet the Council’s rate philosophies and values established during the rate
structure review process. It is important to understand the Council will not be considering actual
water and wastewater rates during this study but only the structure that would be used for future
rate setting processes.
There are four study sessions planned between July and October 2017 and a final meeting for a
final report on the recommended rate structure in December. These sessions will introduce the
rate setting process and ultimately provide guidance to the City Council through its selection of a
water and wastewater rate structure. A cost of services study will be proposed separately to
review the City’s water and wastewater rates.
Session Topic Outcome
1 Fundamentals of Rate Structures
Basic understanding of water and wastewater
rate structure design and review prior rate
design goals and objectives
2 Rate Design Goals and Objectives Prioritize the City Council’s rate structure
goals and objectives
3 Developing Conceptual Rate Structures Review conceptual water and wastewater
rate structures
4 Technical Review of Rate Structures Review the final selected conceptual water
and wastewater rate structures
5 Selection of Rate Structures Receive a report with final recommended
water and wastewater rate structures
Study Session 1. Fundamentals of Rate Structures – July 18, 2017
HDR will guide a thorough discussion on the fundamentals of developing cost-based water and
wastewater rate structures and the philosophy of rate setting, underlying rate sett ing goals and
objectives, terminology, and technical aspects of rate structure design. The presentation and
interactive dialogue with the City Council will provide an overview of the rate setting
methodology and the correlation between rate structure design and revenue generation to lay the
foundation for the process.
Packet Pg. 24
2
Study Session 2. Rate Design Goals and Objectives – August 15, 2017
HDR will lead a discussion of commonly accepted rate design goals and objectives, their
meanings and implications to an overall rate structure design, and discuss typical rate structure
design goals. From this dialogue, the City Council will be asked to prioritize its top six rate
structure goals for use in developing the conceptual rate structures for review and discussion at
Study Session 3.
Study Session 3. Conceptual Rate Structures – September 2017 (working on specific date)
At Study Session 3, HDR will present the results of the City Council weighting of recommended
rate structure goals for discussion. Based on the City’s prioritized rate design goals and
objectives, conceptual water and wastewater rate designs (rate structures only, no actual rates,
meaning no dollars) will be presented. Based on input from the meeting, HDR and staff will then
narrow the field and select the top three rate structures. These three rate structures will be
evaluated and presented to the Council in Study Session 4.
Study Session 4. Technical Review of Rate Structures – October 2017 (working on specific
date)
A fourth Study Session with the City Council is planned where HDR will present the “road test”
of the final selected conceptual rate structure which will support the prioritized goals and
financial policies. Actual rates and bill comparisons will be used to review any impacts to
ratepayers based on current revenue levels (i.e. current rates). Although there will be numbers
associated with the “road test” it is not an exercise in setting the actual rates.
Meeting 5. Selection of the Final Rate Structures – December 5, 2017
After completion of the study sessions, HDR will provide the Council with a report summarizing
the steps taken to review the rate structure, an overview of the rate structures reviewed during the
study, recommendations of the analysis HDR will undertake, and recommended final proposed
water and wastewater rate structure.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
No environmental review is required for Water and Wastewater Rate Structure Review study
sessions.
CONCURRENCES
Concurrence from other City departments is not required for Water and Wastewater Rate
Structure Review study sessions.
FISCAL IMPACT
On January 3, 2017, the City Council approved Request for Qualifications for On-Call Water and
Wastewater Engineering Services and authorized the City Manager to execute agreements with
the selected consulting firms. The City Manager awarded contracts to 12 engineering consulting
firms on May 23, 2017, including HDR. Staff solicited a proposal from HDR for the Water and
Wastewater Rate Structure Review. The project was funded from Water and Sewer Fund general
carry-over totaling $29,885.
Packet Pg. 25
2
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 26
2
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk
Prepared By: Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO THE TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
(TBID) AND BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BAC)
RECOMMENDATION
In accordance with the recommendations of the Council Subcommittees:
1. Confirm the appointment of Bruce Skidmore to the Tourism Business Improvement District
to complete an unexpired term through March 31, 2021; and
2. Confirm the appointment of Timothy Jouet to the Bicycle Advisory Committee to complete
an unexpired term through March 31, 2019; and
3. Confirm the appointment of Layla Lopez to the Bicycle Advisory Committee to complete an
unexpired term through March 31, 2018.
DISCUSSION
Tourism Business Improvement District (Subcommittee Members Gomez and Rivoire)
On March 21, 2017, the Council made appointments to the City’s Advisory Bodies effective
April 1, 2017 and to direct the City Clerk to continue to recruit for any unfilled vacancies.
During that time, the Tourism Business Improvement District had three scheduled vacancies. Of
those vacancies, two were filled leaving one unfilled.
The City Clerk’s office conduced an open recruitment and the Council Liaison Subcommittee
recommends the appointment of Bruce Skidmore to the Tourism Business Improvement District,
effective July 18, 2017, to a term expiring on March 31, 2021.
Bicycle Advisory Committee (Subcommittee Members Pease and Gomez)
Due to the resignation of Catherine Riedstra, effective May 25, 2017, there was an unscheduled
vacancy on the Bicycle Advisory Committee. Ms. Riedstra’s term would have expired on March
31, 2019.
Due to the resignation of Paula Huddleston, effective May 18, 2017, there was an unscheduled
vacancy on the Bicycle Advisory Committee. Ms. Huddleston’s term would have expired on
March 31, 2018.
The Council Liaison Subcommittee recommends the appointment of Timothy Jouet to the
Bicycle Advisory Committee, effective July 18, 2017, to a term expiring March 31, 201 9, and
Packet Pg. 27
3
Layla Lopez, effective July 18, 2017, to a term expiring on March 31, 2018.
RECRUITMENT
The following Advisory Bodies have vacancies and interested individuals are encouraged to
apply:
1. Area Agency on Aging (1)
2. Architectural Review Commission (1)
3. Construction Board of Appeals (2) – one of the vacancies is for a representative with
disability
4. Citizens’ Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (1)
5. Human Relations Commission (1)
6. Parks and Recreation Commission (1)
7. Personnel Board (1)
CONCURRENCES
The Council Liaison subcommittee concurs with the recommendations.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended actions in this
report.
FISCAL IMPACT
Operating the TBID is part of the work program for the Tourism Program. There is no additional
fiscal impact for the BAC.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
A hard copy of the Advisory Body applications has been provided to the City Council and are
available for public review in the City Clerk’s office.
Packet Pg. 28
3
San Luis Obispo Page 1
Tuesday, May 16, 2017
Regular Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, May
16, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Vice Mayor
Dan Rivoire, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson,
Assistant City Manager; and Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk; were present at Roll
Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated
in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice Mayor Dan Rivoire led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PROCLAMATION
1. NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES WEEK
Mayor Harmon provided a presentation to Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director, and Carrie
Mattingly, Utilities Director, declaring May 21-27, 2017 as "National Public Works and
Utilities Week."
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
David Brodie
Don Hedrick
Kit Gould
James Lopes
Packet Pg. 29
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 2
Mila Vujovich–Le Barre
---End of Public Comment---
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 2 thru 4 and 6
thru 8.
Council Member Pease pulled item 5 for separate consideration.
Council Member Pease noted her recusal from discussion on item 5 due to a working
relationship with the project architect and left the dais at 6:36 p.m.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR RIVOIRE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 4-0 (PEASE RECUSED) to approve Consent Calendar Item 5.
Council Member Pease returned to the dais at 6:44 p.m.
2. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
3. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF MARCH 21, 2017 AND
APRIL 10, 2017
CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of March 21, 2017 and
April 10, 2017.
4. RAILROAD DISTRICT SIDEWALK ENGINEERING STANDARD
MODIFICATION
CARRIED 5-0, to
1. Approve modifications to the Railroad District Sidewalk Engineering Standard 4150; and
2. Approve a new Railroad District Tree Well Engineering Standard 8135.
5. AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO DEVFLOPMENT AGREEMENT
DISCUSSIONS WITH AVILA RANCH, LLC
*Item 5 pulled by Council Member Pease for separate consideration.
CARRIED 4-0 (PEASE RECUSED), to
1. Authorize staff to initiate discussions with Avila Ranch, LLC for a Development
Agreement; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a Third Party Reimbursement
Packet Pg. 30
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 3
Agreement with Avila Ranch, LLC, as necessary, requiring Avila Ranch, LLC to
reimburse the City for the costs of any outside legal or technical consultants the City may
require to assist with the negotiation or review of the Avila Ranch application for a
Development Agreement.
Public Comments:
Mila Vujovich-Le Barre
David Brodie
Sarah Flickinger
Paul Rys
---End of Public Comment---
6. AUTHORIZE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PARKING ENFORCEMENT
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PEMS), SPECIFICATION NO. 91495
CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the City Manager to enter into contract with PassportParking,
Inc. for the Parking Enforcement Management System (PEMS), Specification No. 91495,
for a five-year period.
7. AUTHORIZE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PARKING ACESS AND
REVENUE CONTROL SYSTEM (PARCS), SPECIFICATION NO 91545
CARRIED 5-0, to:
1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Parking Access and Revenue
Control System (PARCS), Specification No. 91545; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with the successful bidder within
authorized project budget, and
3. Authorize the City Attorney to approve modifications to the form of the contract with the
successful bidder.
8. FRIENDS OF LA LOMA ADOME MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San
Luis Obispo and the Friends of La Loma Adobe for preliminary evaluation and restoration
activities.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
9. PUBLIC HEARING – ESTABLIGHMENT OF PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL
ORDINANCE FOR INFLOW AND INFILTRATION REDUCTION
Utilities Director Mattingly, Utilities Deputy Director Hix, and Utilities Project Manager
Metz provided an in-depth staff report with the help of a Power Point presentation and
responded to Council questions.
Packet Pg. 31
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 4
Public Comments:
Steve Delmartini
Bob Mourenza
Sandra Rowley
Paul Rys
Graham Updegrove
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR RIVOIRE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to not Introduce Ordinance No. 1635 and
continue item to a date uncertain to:
Consider introduction of Ordinance No. 1635 (2017 Series) entitled “An Ordinance of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Chapter 13.08 of the San
Luis Obispo Municipal Code creating a Sewer Lateral Inspection and Replacement
Program” related to maintenance, inspection, repair, and replacement of private sewer
laterals and determining the ordinance modifications are exempt from environmental review
pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Item continued to a date uncertain.
10. NATURAL RESOURCES ROUNDTABLE VISION PLAN
Assistant City Manager Johnson and Natural Resources Manager Hill provided an in-depth
staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Bill Waycott
Greg Bettencourt
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to as recommended by the Natural Resources
Roundtable, adopt Resolution No. 10795 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving “Saving Special Places
Forever a Vision Plan to Complete and Sustain the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt.”
RECESS
Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened at 8:17 p.m., with all Council Members present.
11. PUBLIC HEARING – FORMATION OF A GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY
AGENCY
Packet Pg. 32
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 5
Utilities Director Carrie Mattingly and Utilities Deputy Director Aaron Floyd provided an
in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Don Hedrick
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Rescind all prior approvals and appointments associated with the formation of a
Groundwater Sustainability Agency from the March 7, 2017 City Council meeting; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 10796 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California authorizing the City of San Luis Obispo to
become a Groundwater Sustainability Agency for the San Luis Obispo Valley
Groundwater Basin for the area that lies beneath and within the jurisdictional boundaries
of the City of San Luis Obispo”; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to approve use of up to $200,000 of water fund working
capital for expenditures related to the formation and administration of a groundwater
sustainability agency and the development of a groundwater sustainability plan; and
4. Authorize the City Manager to execute a letter to the California Department of Water
Resources notifying them of the City’s decision to become a Groundwater Sustainability
Agency as required by Water Code § 10723.8; and
5. Authorize the City’s Utilities Director to perform any acts necessary under the
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act in order to effectuate the purposes and acts
authorized herein; and
6. Once formed, appoint Council Member Pease and the Utilities Director as an alternative
representative to serve on the to the Groundwater Sustainability Commission
12. CALL FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION AND TAKE OTHER RELATED ACTIONS TO
SUBMIT TO THE VOTERS ‘”AN INITIATIVE TO REPEAL CHAPTER 15.10 OF
THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED “RENTAL HOUSING
INSPECTION” AND TO ADOPT NEW CHAPTER 15.10 ENTITLED “NON-
DISCRIMINATION IN HOUSING’”
City Clerk Gallagher provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Stew Jenkins
Kevin Rice
Paul Rys
Packet Pg. 33
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 6
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 10797 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, Calling and Giving Notice of the Holding of a
Special All Mailed Ballot Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, August 22, 2017,
for the submission of a proposed ordinance and requesting the Board of Supervisors to
render services relating to the conduct of the election.” As amended to read:
Shall an ordinance be adopted to replace former
Chapter 15.10 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled “Rental Housing Inspection”
(repealed by City Council Ordinance 1632, effective
April 20, 2017), with new Chapter 15.10 to be
entitled “Non-Discrimination in Housing”?
YES
NO
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR RIVOIRE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to:
2. Provide direction regarding the City Council’s argument against the initiative;
as amended to appoint an Ad-Hoc Committee consisting of Council Members
Christianson and Gomez to prepare and submit argument against the measure and
rebuttal if warranted and that the entire Council meet to review and sign the argument on
May 30th at a time to be determined.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 10798 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, setting priorities for filing written arguments
regarding a City measure and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial
analysis.” amended to read: Carlyn Christianson (Council Member Against)
Aaron Gomez (Council Member Against)
4. Consider a resolution (Recommendation 3) appointing an ad-hoc subcommittee
consisting of two of its members to prepare and submit an argument against the measure
and rebuttal argument, if warranted;
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE CARRIED 5-0 to:
5. Appropriate funds from the undesignated General Fund Reserve up to $160,000, for
assistance from the San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder to conduct this special
election.
Council Member Christianson noted approval to direct the City Attorney to prepare an
impartial analysis as stated which was previously moved and adopted in Resolution No.
10798.
Packet Pg. 34
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 7
13. DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Assistant City Manager Johnson provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council
questions.
Public Comments:
David Brodie
Cheryl McLean
Don Hedrick
Kevin Rice
Stew Jenkins
Nicholas DePaoli
Paul Rys
---End of Public Comment---
City Manager Lichtig clarified Council direction to update to Council Policy and Procedure
Manual to include a 30-minute limitation on public comment for items not on the agenda and to
carry over any remaining speaker time to the end of the meeting; she noted a need to update the
current Public Speaker Card to reflect this change as well as a need to stay flexible and adjust the
limitations on a need be basis.
By consensus, Council provided the following direction to staff to bring back an agenda item
regarding a time limit change to the Council Policy and Procedure Manual regarding public
comment on items not on the agenda.
14. APPOINTED OFFICIALS’ COMPENSATION
Human Resources Director Irons and Human Resources Analyst Sutter provided an in-depth
staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Don Hedrick
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR RIVOIRE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 10799 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending a contract of employment for City
Attorney”; and
2. Authorize the Mayor to execute an amendment to the City Attorney’s contract of
employment which includes the right for City Attorney to cash out three weeks of
accrued vacation at the end of every fiscal year
Packet Pg. 35
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 8
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS
Mayor Harmon reported attending multiple events at Cal Poly including the Frost Gift Lunch,
visited the Honor Society, attended the service awards and judged the Greek’s lip syncing
contest which raised thousands of dollars for Jacks Helping Hands, she reported on attending the
Business Symposium of Local Energy in Long Beach, she went on a ride along with the SLOFD
and attended Coffee with a Cop and encouraged public to attend future events.
Council Member Pease reported attending the Student Community Liaison Committee and
praised students for their volunteerism efforts.
Vice Mayor Rivoire reminded the public of Bike Week and noted some local events being held
to encourage participation.
Council Member Gomez reported attending the Energy Symposium in Long Beach and the 1st
quarterly U-40 event which topic was centered around housing.
CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 54956.9; Name of case: Friends of
71 Palomar v. City Council of San Luis Obispo, et al.; San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case
No. 17CV-0259
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
None.
---End of Public Comment---
RECESS
Council recessed at 10:20 p.m. to the Council Hearing Room at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California 93401 to hear the Closed Session item.
Assistant City Manager Johnson recused himself.
Council Member Pease recused herself.
MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER
RIVOIRE, CARRIED 4-0 (PEASE RECUSED) to: give authority to City Attorney to defend
writ action and hire outside Council Jarvis, Fay, Doporto and Gibson; to execute a legal service
agreement in an amount to cover defense costs, and to enter into a reimbursement agreement
with the developer for defense costs.
Closed Session adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. to a Special Meeting to be held on Thursday, June 1, 2017
at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, to hold a
Packet Pg. 36
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 16, 2017 Page 9
preliminary budget workshop. The next Regular City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,
June 6, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California.
__________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2017
Packet Pg. 37
5
San Luis Obispo Page 1
Thursday, June 1, 2017
Special Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Thursday, June,
1, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Vice Mayor
Dan Rivoire, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson,
Assistant City Manager; and Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk; were present at Roll
Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated
in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Carlyn Christianson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
BUSINESS ITEM/BUDGET WORKSHOP
1. PRELIMINARY 2017-19 FINANCIAL PLAN
City Manager Lichtig, Interim Finance Director Bradford, and Contract Budget Manager
Courtney Steck provided an in-depth staff report with the use of a Power Point presentation
and responded to Council questions.
Discussion involved:
Expenses and Reserves
Department Level Operating Expenses
City Administration
Finance Department
Human Resources
Packet Pg. 38
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 1, 2017 Page 2
Public Works
Utilities
Director of Public Works Daryl Grigsby provided a report on the development of the Plan; he
discussed changes that staff had made to the Plan as directed by Council at the April 18 City
Council Meeting. These changes included the addition of the Safe Routes to School Foothill
Crossing, Broad Street Bicycle Boulevard and Laguna Lake Dredging. He noted additional
changes to the Plan since last presented to Council. These will include, Neighborhood Traffic
Management, Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing in addition to Mission Plaza Restroom.
Interim Finance Director Bradford restated staff’s recommendations to include:
1. Provide direction on General Fund Operating Program; and
2. Provide direction on Capital Improvement Program.
Public Comments:
Eric Meyer
Lea Brooks
Harry Busselen
John Ashbaugh
Jamie Lopes
Lydia Mourenza
Rick Racouillat
Sandra Rowley
Kit Gould
Kathie Walker
Angela Soll
Cheryl McLean
---End of Public Comment---
City Manager Lichtig summarized Council consensus to take the Park and Rec Element funds
from the $900,000 and leave the remaining money for the park, to continue to fund the Safe
Routes to School and the Broad Street Bike Boulevard, she noted a desire to put some greater
clarity in pursuing a particular site in collaboration with the Safe Routes to School, and that there
be some type of articulation to pursue a time frame for a park in the North Broad Street.
Discussion ensued regarding clarity on SB1 funding.
RECESS
Council recessed at 7:25 p.m. and reconvened at 7:45 p.m., with all Council Members
present.
City Manager Lichtig further summed up staffs understanding of Council direction.
Packet Pg. 39
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 1, 2017 Page 3
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS
Mayor Harmon reported attending an all-day public speaking workshop in San Francisco.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m. to the next Regular City Council Meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
June 6, 2017 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
__________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2017
Packet Pg. 40
5
San Luis Obispo Page 1
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
Regular Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, June
20, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Vice Mayor Dan Rivoire,
and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: Andy Pease
City Staff
Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Michael Codron,
Community Development Director; and Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk;
were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to
questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
None.
---End of Public Comment---
CLOSED SESSION
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL –EXISTING LITIGATION
Pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 54956.9 Name of case:
Friends of 71 Palomar v. City Council of San Luis Obispo, et al.; San Luis Obispo Superior
Court Case No. 17CV-0259
ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 20, 2017 TO BEGIN AT 6:00 P.M.
Packet Pg. 41
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 2
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, June
20, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Carlyn Christianson, Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Vice Mayor
Dan Rivoire, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson,
Assistant City Manager; and Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk; were present
at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as
indicated in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice Mayor Rivoire led the Pledge of Allegiance.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Dietrick stated that there was no reportable action for Closed Session Items A; she
noted that Council Member Pease was recused from this item.
PRESENTATIONS
1. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMENDATIONS/AWARD PINNING
Police Chief Cantrell provided a presentation recognizing Officer Sisemore for his
Lifesaving actions and Christine Flock for her contribution to public safety.
2. PROCLAMATION - SAN LUIS OBISPO MUSEUM OF ART
Mayor Harmon provided a presentation of a proclamation to Karen Kile, Executive Director,
representing the San Luis Obispo Museum of Art, recognizing how an investment in the San
Luis Obispo Museum of Art’s distinctive new home will ensure that a revitalized Museum of
Art can continue to have a significant and lasting impact on this City’s excellent cultural and
economic well-being, now and for future generations.
Packet Pg. 42
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 3
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Rigo Diaz
Frank Brown
Donald Hedrick
Rachel Kovesdi
John Ashbaugh
Jonathan Roberts
---End of Public Comment---
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 3 thru 8 and
items 10 thru 12.
By Council consensus, the agenda was reordered to enable Item 9 to be considered after Item 13
-Public Hearing – Adoption of 2017-19 Financial Plan and 2017-18 Budget.
3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
4. MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2017
CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of March 28, 2017.
5. REVISED 2016 WATER RESOURCES STATUS
CARRIED 5-0, to receive and file the revised 2016 Water Resources Status Report.
6. RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DELEGATION OF INVESTMENT
AUTHORITY TO THE CITY TREASURER THROUGH THE 2017-18 FISCAL
YEAR
CARRIED 5-0, to adopt Resolution No. 10809 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, extending the delegation of
Investment Authority to the City Treasurer through the 2017-18 Fiscal Year.”
7. APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2928, 1321 OSOS STREET (TR 96-
13)
CARRIED 5-0, to adopt Resolution No. 10810 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the final map for Tract
2928 (1321 Osos Street, TR 96-13)” authorizing the Mayor to execute a Subdivision
Agreement, and authorizing the Public Works Director to accept the subdivision improvements
and release the securities.
Packet Pg. 43
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 4
8. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PETSAFE® BARK FOR YOUR PARK™ GRANT
PROGRAM APPLICATION
Public Comment
John McKenzie
---End of Public Comment---
CARRIED 5-0, to:
1. Adopt Resolution No 10811 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the Parks and Recreation Director, or
their designee, to execute and fulfill any related PetSafe® Bark for Your Park™ grant
applications, certifications, assurances, forms, agreements, and associated documents on
behalf of the City,” for a grant total amount not to exceed $25,000 for the design and
construction of a new PetSafe® dog park within City limits, and
2. Authorize the City Manager to take necessary action to include the project in the
budget and Capital Improvement Program upon grant award.
9. APPROVAL OF A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH AMBIENT
COMMUNITIES FOR OFFSITE AND OVERSIZED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS
Item 9 pulled by Council Member Christianson for further discussion and consideration; by
general consensus of the Council, this item was reordered and to be heard immediately
following Item 13 - Public Hearing – Adoption of 2017-19 Financial Plan and 2017-18
Budget.
Public Comment
Shawn Reed, Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) Partner
---End of Public Comment---
10. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY’S COLLECTION OF FIRE AND
LIFE SAFETY INSPECTION FEES
CARRIED 5-0, to Adopt Resolution No. 10813 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo
County Auditor to collect fees for 2017-18 fire and life safety inspections of multi-dwelling
properties containing three or more dwelling units on the secured property tax roll pursuant
to California Government Code Section 54988, et seq.
Packet Pg. 44
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 5
11. MONTEREY/OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION, SPECIFICATION NO.
91377
CARRIED 5-0, to:
1. Approve Plans and Specifications for the “Monterey/Osos Traffic Signal Installation
Project, Specification No. 91377,” and authorize staff to advertise for construction bids; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to award a contract if the total of the bid plus contingency is
within the available project at time of award; and
3. Approve the transfer of $191,000 from various Public Works Transportation accounts to
the Monterey/Osos Traffic Signal Installation Project account.
12. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR 2017-18
CARRIED 5-0, to adopt Resolution No. 10814 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting the appropriations limit
for 2017-18” for the City of San Luis Obispo.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
13. PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF 2017-19 FINANCIAL PLAN AND 2017-18
BUDGET
City Manager Lichtig and Interim Finance Director Bradford provided an in-depth staff
report with the use of a Power Point presentation and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Cory Jones
Lea Brooks
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
VICE MAYOR RIVOIRE, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 10815 (2017 Series)
entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California,
approving the 2017-19 Financial Plan and 2017-18 Budget” amended to include in the 2017-
19 Financial Plan as follows:
1. Amend the Major City Goals Work Program to eliminate the Citizen Task Force on pg.
C1-37 of the Financial Plan; include where appropriate as separate item or as
amendment to the existing work program number 2 on pg C1-38 of the Financial Plan
other options to engage the community to achieve those goals including the following:
create a speakers’ bureau, establish a repository of information available to the public,
and/or hold community meetings/workshops.
2. Amend the Major City Goals Work Program to include a new section 13 to implement
strategies to reduce plastic water bottles consumption at City facilities and implement
measures to reduce plastic straws through a program of only demand on request. Packet Pg. 45
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 6
CONSENT CALENDAR – REORDER OF AGENDA
9. APPROVAL OF A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH AMBIENT
COMMUNITIES FOR OFFSITE AND OVERSIZED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
ASSOCIATED WITH ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS
This item was reordered from the Consent Calendar by general consensus of the Council.
Public Comment
Shawn Reed, Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) Partner
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Item 9.
1. Adopt Resolution No. 10812 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Reimbursement Agreement with
Ambient Communities for offsite and oversized public improvements associated with
Orcutt Area Specific Plan development projects” and;
2. Authorize the Mayor to execute said Agreement, and authorize the Public Works Director
to implement said Agreement.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
14. PUBLIC HEARING - TAX AND EQUITY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT
(TEFRA) HEARING REGARDING THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO ISSUANCE OF A TAX-EXEMPT DEBT OBLIGATION TO FINANCE
THE REHABILITATION BOND OF 55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AT 1092
ORCUTT ROAD, 1102 IRONBARK, AND 1363 PISMO STREET
Community Development Director Codron and Planning Technician Orozco provided an in-
depth staff report with the use of a Power Point presentation and responded to Council
questions.
Public Comments:
None
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1. Conduct a public hearing under the Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA)
of 1982 pursuant to the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and Packet Pg. 46
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 7
2. Adopt Resolution No. 10816 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the incurring of a tax-exempt
obligation by the Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo for the purpose of
providing additional financing for the rehabilitation of Laurel Creek, Ironbark and Pismo
Buchon Apartments.”
15. RESCINDING THE LOCAL DROUGHT EMERGENCY AND ASSOCIATED
RESOLUTIONS
Utilities Director Mattingly, Utilities Deputy Director Floyd, and Water Resources Program
Manager Boerman provided an in-depth staff report with the use of a Power Point
presentation and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Mark Jorgenson
Natalie Lee
Michael Zohns
Linda Zohns
Paul Schmidt
Joe Sabol
Charlotte Gorton
Donald Hedrick
Lindsey James
Brendan Coalwell
Frank Brown
Les Ferreira
Nick Cirone
---End of Public Comment---
RECESS
Council recessed at 8:39 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 p.m., with all Council Members present.
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 10817 (2017
Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, rescinding the local drought emergency associated resolutions restricting water
usage” which will do the following as amended and with the following direction received:
a. Rescind Resolution Nos. 10566, 10627, 10628, and 10635, ending the local drought
emergency declaration and associated water use restrictions; and
b. Rescind Resolution No. 10629 which authorized and established a permit fee and
regulations for the use of the Corporation Yard non-potable well and direct staff to make
necessary changes to eliminate public access to the well.
Packet Pg. 47
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 8
c. Strike Section 3 and Recital 4 and any other necessary changes to the resolution
(Attachment F) to conform to the Councils action to allow limited non-resident use of
corporation yard well for a period of time and eliminate use of the well by City residents.
d. Directed staff to send a letter from the City Council to the Board of Supervisors advising
of the actions that took place from tonight’s meeting; look at an alternative way to
monitor the Corp Yard well use; continue the Corp Yard Well Program for O’Conner
Way, Cotton Wood, West Foothill area where the wells are dry; and work with the
community and county to see what solutions present themselves. Staff to provide an
update to Council within 1 year.
16. COMMUNITY BUDGET TASK FORCE
Due to the removal of this Community Budget Task Force from the Work Program during
Item 13 - Public Hearing - Adoption of 2017-19 Financial Plan and 2017-18 Budget; this
item (16) was removed from the agenda and no action was taken.
17. BUSINESS LICENSE COMPLIANCE PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Interim Finance Director Bradford provided an in-depth staff report with the use of a Power
Point presentation and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
None
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Business License Compliance
implementation plan, as amended to extend the implementation period to 3 months.
18. SUPPORT FOR THE GOALS OF CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 562: THE
HEALTHY CALIFORNIA ACT
City Attorney Dietrick and Legal Assistant White provided an in-depth staff report with the
use of a Power Point presentation and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
Nicholas Andre
Kayne Randolph
---End of Public Comment---
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL
MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 4-1 (CHRISTIANSON VOTING NO) to adopt Resolution
No. 10818 (2017 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, in support of the goal of Senate Bill 562 (Lara) to create The Healthy
California Program to provide comprehensive, universal, single-payer health care coverage
Packet Pg. 48
5
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 20, 2017 Page 9
and a health care cost control system for the benefit of all residents of the State.”
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS
Council Member Pease reported attending the Zone 9 meeting and reported on the Mid-Higuera
Bypass Project.
Vice Mayor Rivoire reported attending San Luis Obispo Council of Government (SLOCOG)
meetings.
Mayor Harmon reported attending several meetings at Cal Poly and noted having open office
hours at the SLO HotHouse; she met with the League of Women Voters to discuss the
implementation of the Concierge Program at future City Council meetings and attended her first
Neighborhood Walk; lastly, Mayor Harmon reported presenting the “Bone to the City” to Bixby
the traveling dog, and noted that Bixby is raising awareness for local humane societies.
Vice Mayor Rivoire requested that staff remove the split screen feature at the Council dais
monitors, he opined that it would be more beneficial to view the full presentation.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:28 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting of July 4, 2017 was
previously cancelled and rescheduled for Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., in
the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
__________________________
Heather Goodwin, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2017
Packet Pg. 49
5
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 50
5
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director
Prepared By: Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF A RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND CC SOCCER CORPORATION.
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission, adopt a Recreation Partnership
Agreement between the City and CC Soccer Corporation (CCS) to provide an Adult Recreational
Soccer Program.
DISCUSSION
Background
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to providing recreational opportunities within its
community. For years, the City and CCS have maintained a partnership which has resulted in the
use of the Damon Garcia Sports Fields by CCS for the purpose of providing an adult recreational
soccer league program.
CCS has been successfully providing adult soccer league
program and has played a supporting role in recreational
programming for adults with the City’s Parks and Recreation
Department since 2008. The Parks and Recreation Department
and CCS desire to continue to collaboratively offer
programming together and avoid duplication of programs and
efforts by memorializing their partnership via this proposed
agreement.
Proposed Recreation Partnership Agreement
For several months, both parties have met to renew a
recreational partnership agreement memorializing the
longstanding relationship two and managing potential liability
associated with the use of the City’s facilities by CCS
participants. In general, the terms of the proposed agreement
reflect the existing partnership between the City and the CCS
and allows both parties to continue to provide essential and
quality recreational opportunities for the community’s adults.
Highlights of the Proposed Agreement
The City owns, maintains, and programs activities at the
Damon-Garcia Sports Field Complex. This Recreation
Partnership Agreement seeks to avoid duplication of an adult
recreational soccer program which is currently coordinated by
Packet Pg. 51
6
CCS on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Department. Risk management oversight is ensured
through the standardization and collection of liability waivers for all program participants. This
Recreation Partnership Agreement encompasses four soccer seasons annually and, when
applicable (and not in conflict with other City and/or youth programming), gives priority of field
use to CCS. CCS is responsible for collecting participant fees and agrees to a program revenue
sharing that is consistent with adopted fiscal policies for adult recreational activities. CCS
agrees to remit the revenue reimbursement to the City upon conclusion of each soccer season.
The main highlights of the proposed Recreation Partnership Agreement are provided below:
The term of this agreement shall be for one year from September 1, 2017 to August 31, 2018.
Upon the expiration of the agreement, the agreement terms will be reviewed by City and CCS
and may be extended for three additional 1-year terms through to August 31, 2021, upon mutual
consent of both parties.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The recommended actions for use of an existing field for soccer is not a project under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Packet Pg. 52
6
CONCURRENCES
The Public Works Parks Maintenance staff maintain the fields at the Damon-Garcia Sports
Complex and have provided input supporting the partnership agreement with CCS. Parks
Maintenance staff have reviewed the proposed language and concur with the terms set forth in
the proposed recreational partnership agreement with CCS and concur that they are maintainable
at the City facilities identified. Additionally, the CCS president and vice president have
reviewed the future agreement and concurs with the terms as proposed.
The Parks and Recreation Commission met on June 7, 2017 and provided input on the proposed
Recreation Agreement (Attachment B - PRC Meeting Minutes). The Parks and Recreation
Commission unanimously supported the terms of the agreement as presented.
FISCAL IMPACT
Consistent with Council Adopted Fiscal Policies for Cost Recovery
Parks and Recreation user fees are guided by adopted policy, actual costs, and market
comparisons. The City’s adopted Budget and Fiscal Policies provide specific policies about cost
recovery goals. A higher recovery of 60-100% is suggested for adult recreational programming
(Attachment C – Financial Management Manual, Section G Recreation Program Cost Recovery).
CCS’s estimated annually reimbursement to the City, as proposed in the Agreement, is reflective
of full cost recovery at the adopted policy level and is consistent with projected Parks and
Recreation Department revenues for sports programming and facilities. A summary of the
annual proposed CCS use and payment to the City is provided in the figure below:
ALTERNATIVES
1. Revise the Recreation Partnership Agreement As Proposed. Council could direct staff
to revise various terms of the Recreation Partnership Agreement to better reflect
Council’s intent. If Council has specific revision they should be given when this item is
presented for review.
Packet Pg. 53
6
2. Not Approve the Recreation Partnership Agreement. Council could elect to not approve
this Recreation Partnership Agreement between the City Parks and Recreation and CCS.
Staff does not believe that there is a compelling reason to do so. This agreement
represents a long-term community partnership based on historical use and measurable
community benefits that are in alignment with City policies.
Attachments:
a - Proposed Agreement CCS
b - Fiscal Policy Financial Mgt Manual Section G Recreation
c - PRC Mtg Minutes_06.07.2017_Draft
Packet Pg. 54
6
RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND CC SOCCER CORPORATION (CCS)
THIS RECREATION PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND
CC SOCCER CORPORATION, is in support of common adult recreational soccer activities for the benefit
of the community is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on July 18, 2017 by and between
the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and CC
SOCCER CORPORATION, a nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation, hereinafter referred to as CCS.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the CITY and CCS desire to continue to offer residents of the City of San Luis
Obispo high-quality recreational opportunities in a collaborative fashion; and
WHEREAS, the CITY and CCS seek to avoid duplication of adult recreational soccer programs;
and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to maintain a mutually beneficial relationship between the CITY
and CCS as a way to continue to enhance the sense of community for residents; and
WHEREAS, the CITY owns, maintains and programs the San Luis Obispo Damon -Garcia Sports
Field Complex and the CCS desires to have access to outdoor fields to continue to provide an adult soccer
league as a programmed use of the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields Complex; and
WHEREAS, the CITY has determined that partnerships with community organizations to provide
shared services to the community are of great benefit and CCS has expressed a willingness to continue
these shared services, in partnership and in cooperation with and assistance from the CITY;
WHEREAS, CCS shall reimburse the CITY a portion of the revenues collected to assist in
offsetting costs associated with adult soccer activities on the Damon-Garcia outdoor sport fields;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be for one (1) year from September 1, 2017 to August 31,
2018. The terms of this Agreement may be extended for three additional one-year terms upon the
mutual written agreement of the parties through to August 31, 2021.
2. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT. The CITY and CCS agree to the following terms and conditions
associated with providing recreational programming and the use of CITY facilities for the sole purpose
of providing shared adult recreational programming for the benefit of the community. Fees for the use
of CITY facilities shall be collected and remitted by CCS to the CITY in accordance with the payment
schedules as prescribed below in Section 2.A. Fees for participation are based on the mutually agreed
fee recovery that includes standard City of San Luis Obispo facility use fees. Fees included in this
Agreement are subject to change with future Agreement modifications and/or as directed by the City
Council.
A. Program income from participant activity fees for registered Adult Male only, Adult Female
Only and Adult Co-Ed leagues shall be divided as follows:
1. Thirty (30) percent of participant activity fees to CITY.
2. Seventy (70) percent of participant activity fees to CCS.
B. CCS shall remit payment to the CITY for four (4) adult soccer seasons within 30 days of
conclusion of the season on November 30th, January 31st, March 31st and June 30th of each
Packet Pg. 55
6
RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – CITY AND CCS page 2
year.
C. Should there be a dramatic change in revenues collected for shared youth programming, both
parties agree to renegotiate the payment terms set forth in this Agreement.
3. ADULT RECREATIONAL SOCCER LEAGUE
A. This Agreement permits CCS four (4) Adult Soccer seasons held annually as follows:
i. Early Fall: September - October (8 weeks)
ii. Late Fall: November - December (8 weeks)
iii. Winter: January – February (9 weeks)
iv. Spring: March – May (8 weeks)
v. End of Spring and Summer seasons shall be held at an alternative, non-City venue,
due to the annual maintenance closure of Damon-Garcia. CCS will not be permitted
field use from May through August annually.
B. Play at Damon-Garcia Sports Complex is permitted from September through April annually
on the following days:
i. Tuesdays:
1. Play: Half fields, Adult Co-Ed league
2. Fields: Two (2) lower level fields (A, B or C)
3. Duration: Two (2) hours, 7:00 PM – 9:00 PM
4. Matches: Eight (8) matches per night (two (2) per half field)
5. The maximum registered CCS Adult Co-Ed players permitted to play at
Damon-Garcia Sports complex during a season shall be one-hundred and
twenty-eight (128) players.
ii. Thursdays:
1. Play: Full fields, Adult Male Only and Adult Female Only leagues
2. Fields: Two (2) lower level fields (A, B or C)
3. Duration: Three (3) hours, 6:00 PM – 9:00 PM
4. Matches: Four (4) matches per night (two (2) per field)
5. The maximum registered CCS Adult Male Only players permitted to play at
Damon-Garcia Sports complex during a season shall be ninety (90) players.
6. The maximum registered CCS Adult Female Only players permitted to play
at Damon-Garcia Sports complex during a season shall be thirty-two (32)
players.
4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Director
may authorize periodic modifications, within the scope of his/her financial and/or operational
authority, to the Roles and Responsibilities as he/she may deem necessary or appropriate to the
partnership between the CITY and CCS. Any written amendment or modifications to the Roles and
Responsibilities shall be upon mutual consent of both parties .
4.1 CCS OBLIGATIONS
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. CCS will conduct registration of participants.
2. CCS will be responsible for creating Rosters & Game Schedules.
3. CCS will be responsible for providing Equipment such as, flags, balls and cones.
4. CCS will collect liability waivers from participants and keep them on file for the
duration of the agreement.
5. CCS will secure all the necessary Sports Officials and provide training if needed.
6. CCS will provide Uniforms for all the participants.
7. CCS will report any issues with field conditions to the CITY’s Facilities Supervisor
to be forwarded to the Parks Maintenance division.
8. Any program purchases beyond the scope of the agreement shall be discussed
between both parties prior to purchasing.
9. CCS and City staff mutually agree to perform field condition assessments following
each playing season and identify program enhancements.
Packet Pg. 56
6
RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – CITY AND CCS page 3
4.2 CITY OBLIGATIONS
A. SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. In recognition of the long-standing partnership and mutual benefit received by
providing facilities for adult recreational activities, the CITY has agreed to give
priority to and reserve the use of two (2) of the lower level sports fields (A, B or C)
at the Damon-Garcia Sports Complex two nights per week.
2. The CITY will promote CCS Adult Soccer opportunities on the CITY’s website.
3. The CITY will provide and maintain soccer goals and nets for CCS use.
4. The CITY shall maintain the sport fields and update the field marking at Damon-
Garcia Sports Complex weekly.
5. The CITY reserves the right to modify the permitted field of play during the seasons
based on field conditions.
6. The CITY reserves the right to cancel permitted play at Damon-Garcia Sports
Complex in the event of inclement weather or maintenance related issues.
7. The CITY shall notify CCS of any field closures with as much advanced notice as
possible.
8. Any program purchases beyond the scope of the agreement shall be discussed
between both parties prior to purcha sing.
9. CCS and City staff mutually agree to perform field condition assessments following
each playing season and identify program enhancements.
5. OTHER CCS PERMITTING
A. TOURNAMENTS
1. Tournament submittal may be made up to a year in advance but not less than 90 days
before the requested date.
2. Approval of proposed tournament is subject to the approval of CITY Public Works
Department Parks Maintenance division and Parks and Recreation. Denial of tournament
request may be made for the following reasons:
a. The facility is unable to accommodate the proposed activity.
b. The applicant has previously failed to comply with the Tournament Application
conditions required for the event or with the facility usage or Park policies,
producers, and/or regulations.
c. The nature of the activity may endanger the participants, facility, equipment, or
staff.
d. Or based on any substantive reason(s), as deemed by the Parks and Recreation
or Public Works Departments
3. A CCS representative must attend a pre-tournament meeting for approved tournaments
set up by the CITY prior to the tournament date.
4. Tournaments are subject to standard field use fees. A security deposit of $500.00 and a
$70.00 non-refundable permit fee is required for all tournaments and must be paid when
submitting the signed application to secure a tournament date at a CITY facility. All
paperwork and fees must be paid at least seven working days before the scheduled event
6. PENALTIES
A. Under the terms of the Agreement, CCS shall be assessed penalties for use of non-permitted
fields or playing beyond the permitted times. Multiple violations (of three or more) will
constitute a failure by CSS to play on assigned fields and will necessitate a penalty of $300
per violation. Continued violations of permitted field use may result in termination of the
Agreement.
7. INSURANCE AND LIABILITY
A. Each party to this Agreement shall make the other party, its officers, agents, employees and
volunteers as separately additionally insured through a CG 20 26 or equivalent, blanket
endorsement or section of the policy no later than October 1 of each year. Each party agrees
to provide a commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as
Packet Pg. 57
6
RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – CITY AND CCS page 4
Insurance Services Office form CG 00-01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per
occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property
damage, including without limitation, blanket contractual liability.
B. Waivers of Liability for programs listed under the agreement shall be required of all program
participants prior to their participation in a shared recreational activity. City Waivers, signed
by all CCS participants, shall be collected by CCS and provided to the CITY prior to the start
of a season. Participant Liability Waivers shall be maintained by the CITY for a period of
three (3) years.
C. CCS assumes all risks in the performance of all activities authorized by this Agreement and
agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of San Luis Obispo, and its officials,
officers, employees, agents and contractors (hereinafter, collectively the "Indemnitees") from
and against any and all claims, suits, losses, damage or injury to persons or property of
whatsoever kind and nature, whether direct or indirect, caused or contributed to by CCS and
CCS’ contractors, vendors, materialmen, employees, volunteers, agents, invitees and guests,
and/or arising out of CCS' conduct and/or CCS’ performance pursuant to this Agreement,
provided however that CCS’ indemnity shall not extend to any claims, liabilities, losses,
damages, expenses, accidents or occurrences arising out of, relating to, or in connection with:
(i) the negligence of any Indemnity.
8. AGREEMENT AMENDMENT. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be presented in writing by the City’s Parks and Recreation Director and the CCS
President. Should additional fields at Damon-Garcia or other CITY owned recreational facility be made
available, the CITY and CCS may review and propose amendments to the terms set forth in this
Agreement. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be
presented in writing by the City’s Parks and Recreation Director and CCS President and shall be
effective only upon final approval by the City Manager or his/her designee.
10. AGREEMENT TERMINATION. Either party may terminate the Agreement for convenience ,
provided 30 days written notice is given. The Agreement may be terminated by either party for cause,
provided that written notice has been given in the manner specified herein stating the reasons for the
intended termination and providing the other party at least 10 days to cure any alleged breach. If the
party receiving notice fails or refuses to cure the alleged breach within 10 days, or to make substantial
progress toward cure to the satisfaction of the parting demanding cure, this Agreement may be
terminated 10 days after receipt of the notice as specified herein.
11. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by USPS Mail, postage prepaid by
registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
CITY: Parks & Recreation Director
City of San Luis Obispo
1341 Nipomo St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
CC SOCCER: CC Soccer Corporation
CCS President
1574 Fredericks St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
12. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both CITY and CCS do covenant that each
individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
Packet Pg. 58
6
RECREATION PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT – CITY AND CCS page 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
________________________________ By:________________________________
Carrie Gallagher Mayor Heidi Harmon
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CC SOCCER CORPORATION
By:_________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick Erik Slayter, CCS President
City Attorney
Packet Pg. 59
6
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Adopted by City Council April 18, 2017
G. Recreation Programs
The following cost recovery policies apply to the City's recreation programs:
1. Cost recovery for activities directed to adults should be relatively high.
2. Cost recovery for activities directed to youth and seniors should be relative ly low. In those
circumstances where services are similar to those provided in the private sector, cost recovery levels
should be higher.
Although ability to pay may not be a concern for all youth and senior participants, these are desired
program activities, and the cost of determining need may be greater than the cost of providing a uniform
service fee structure to all participants. Further, there is a community-wide benefit in encouraging high-
levels of participation in youth and senior recreation act ivities regardless of financial status.
3. Cost recovery goals for recreation activities are set as follows:
High-Range Cost Recovery Activities - (60% to 100%)
a. Adult athletics
b. Banner permit applications
c. Child care services
d. Facility rentals (indoor and outdoor; excludes use of facilities for internal City uses)
Mid-Range Cost Recovery Activities - (30% to 60%)
e. Triathlon
f. Golf
g. Summer and Spring Break Camps
h. Classes
i. Major commercial film permit applications
Low-Range Cost Recovery Activities- (0 to 30%)
j. Aquatics
k. Community gardens
l. Junior Ranger camp
m. Minor commercial film permit applications
n. Skate park
o. Parks and Recreation sponsored events (except for Triathlon)
p. Youth sports
q. Teen services
r. Senior/boomer services
4. For cost recovery activities of less than 100%, there should be a differential in rates between residents
and non-residents. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to reduce or eliminate
non-resident fee differentials when it can be demonstrated that:
a. The fee is reducing attendance.
b. And there are no appreciable expenditure savings from the reduced attendance.
Packet Pg. 60
6
BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIALS
BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES
Adopted by City Council April 18, 2017
5. Charges will be assessed for use of rooms, pools, gymnasiums, ball fields, special-use areas, and
recreation equipment for activities not sponsored or co-sponsored by the City. Such charges will
generally conform to the fee guidelines described above. However, the Director of Parks and Recreation
is authorized to charge fees that are closer to full cost recovery for facilities that are heavily used at peak
times and include a majority of non-resident users.
6. A vendor charge of at least 10 percent of gross income will be assessed from individuals or organizations
using City facilities for moneymaking activities.
7. Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized to offer reduced fees such as introductory rates, family
discounts and coupon discounts on a pilot basis (not to exceed 18 months) to promote n ew recreation
programs or resurrect existing ones.
8. The Parks and Recreation Department will consider waiving fees only when the City Manager
determines in writing that an undue hardship exists.
Packet Pg. 61
6
Minutes - DRAFT
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
7 June 2017
Regular Meeting of the Advisory Body Committee Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order on the 7th day of June
2017 at 5:34 p.m. in the Parks and Recreation Administration Conference Room located at 1341 Nipomo
Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Avakian.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Greg Avakian, Vice Chair Rodney Thurman, and Commissioners Susan Olson, Keri
Schwab and Jeff Whitener
Absent: Commissioner Single
Staff: Parks and Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck, Recreation Manager Melissa Mudgett
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: APPROVE THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 3, 2017, MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER WHITENER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THURMAN.
1. Consideration of Minutes
CARRIED 5:0:0:1 to approve the amended minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body
for the meeting of 5/3/2017.
AYES: AVAKIAN, OLSON, SCHWAB, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: SINGLE
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Review and Adopt Proposed Recreation Partnership Agreement Between the City of San
Luis Obispo and Central Coast Soccer.
Staff Melissa Mudgett presented an overview of the proposed recreational partnership
agreement between the Parks and Recreation Sports program and Central Coast Soccer (CC
Soccer) to offer adult soccer league programming at Damon Garcia Sports Fields. CC Soccer
has been providing adult soccer opportunities, with the support of the City, since 2008. The
proposed agreement memorializes the long-standing relationship and provides for improved
Packet Pg. 62
6
DRAFT Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of June 7, 2017 Page 2
liability management through standardized trainings and collection of liability waivers. Staff
Mudgett also added the proposed agreement is in alignment with adopted cost recovery policies
for adult recreational activities. She elaborated that the proposed agreement has the support of
CC Soccer, Parks and Recreation and Public Works Parks Maintenance staff, whom maintain
the sports fields.
Public Comment
Tim Townley, Vice President of CC Soccer, explained the adult soccer league program for the
Commissioners. Mr. Townley said that the soccer league is non-competitive and changes
teams every two months. CC Soccer provides additional assistance to the City, such as turning
on-off fields lights, which reduces the impact to City staff. Mr. Townley expressed CC
Soccer’s desire to continue to partner with the City. He said he was h opeful that the new
kikuyu grass will improve field conditions and allow for more play. He concluded that he
appreciated the Commission and Parks and Recreation Department staff and their support in
this program.
Gary Havas, SLO Resident, said he was supportive of the new kikuyu grass and is was nice to
see strong partnerships like this between the City and recreational groups.
Commission Comments followed.
Commissioner Whitener said he was supportive of the proposed agreement and that CC Soccer
has been a good partner for the City.
Commissioner Olson was in support of the one-year terms to reassess field conditions annually.
Vice Chair Thurman asked about the timeframe of the kikuyu grass renovation. Director
Stanwyck responded that is it expected to take the summer growing season. She added that
kikuyu grass is at the golf course and its growth responds well to recycled water. Director
Stanwyck concluded that the City will know how the grass responds after the first playing
season and if play can be expanded.
Chair Avakian asked if the 30% ratio of registration fees collected by CC Soccer is adequate.
Staff Mudgett responded that the revenue share equates to full (100%) cost recovery for the
City, although less teams this first year will mean less revenues received by the City.
ACTION: BY RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT IS ADOPT A RECREATION
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND
CENTRAL COST SOCCER, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHITENER, SECOND
BY COMMISSIONER SCHWAB.
CARRIED 5:0:0:1 to Recommend the City Council adopt a Recreation Partnership Agreement
between the City and Central Coast Soccer to provide an Adult Recreational Soccer League
program.
AYES: AVAKIAN, OLSON, SCHWAB, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: SINGLE
Packet Pg. 63
6
DRAFT Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of June 7, 2017 Page 3
3. Receive Preliminary Dog Off-Leash Survey Results and Consider a Recommendation to
Council that it Authorize staff to Pursue PetSAfe Bark for Your Park Grant.
Staff Mudgett provided a brief background of the Laguna Lake Dog Off-Leash Area. She said
that currently the City has an “off-leash” area at the Laguna Lake park but does not have an
enclosed “fenced” dog park. The closest fenced dog park is located at El Chorro Regional Park
(Highway 1 across from Cuesta College). Staff Mudgett provided an update of current
maintenance activities at the “off-leash” area. Staff Mudgett added that a recent community
survey was conducted to identify future needs of the “off-leash” area. The survey was intended
to solicit feedback from users to help shape current maintenance needs, as well as future
improvements to the area should funding become available (such as with grants or community
donations). Preliminary survey results identified top priorities to be all-surface material and
other amenities, such as a shade structure. Staff Mudgett responded that overall, the users are
happy with the “off-leash” area’s maintenance and do not wish to completely enclose it;
however, users were in support of adding a fenced-in dog park at another location within the
park.
Staff Mudgett presented on the benefits of an enclosed dog park and added that a nationwide
grant to fund construction of a dog park is being offered through PetSafe, Bark for your Park
program. Through the user survey and collaboration with Parks Maintenance staff, potential
locations were identified at the Laguna Lake Park for a “fenced” dog park. Parks and
Recreation staff requested the Commission’s approval to seek grant funding and pursue a more
shovel ready project at Laguna Lake Park and to provide feedback on these potential locations.
Staff Mudgett said that, should the City be awarded the dog park grant, there would be
significant public outreach efforts and staff would return to the Commission for direction
regarding public engagement, preliminary design, estimated project costs and construction
progress.
Public Comment
Bill Hallum, SLO resident and daily “off-leash” area user, as the Commission to consider a
broader policy and develop a City plan for dog parks. Mr. Hallum asked the Commission to
consider a more robust more discussion about dog park needs before seeking a grant. He
commended staff for their responsiveness to users. He expressed apprehension that he would
hate to be locked into a dog park “location” as a result of this grant opportunity.
Gary Havas, SLO Resident and former Parks and Recreation Commissioner, commented that it
had been a long time since an enclosed “fenced” dog park has been sought and he appreciated
staff efforts. He would like to see more dog parks within the City and expressed his support for
pursing the dog park grant.
Commission Comments followed.
Commissioners Olson, Thurman and Avakian were concerned if the PetSafe grant “locked” the
City into deciding a “fenced” dog park location in advance of more study and design efforts.
Director Stanwyck confirmed the dog park grant was restrictive to city-owned land only and
did not “lock” the city into a location should that change in the future. Staff Mudgett added
that, should the city be awarded the grant, funds would need to be expended within three (3)
years of award.
Packet Pg. 64
6
DRAFT Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of June 7, 2017 Page 4
Commissioner Olson expressed dissatisfaction with woodchips as an all-surface material for
dog parks and it is damaging to dog paws, preferring grass. She asked about the standard
“fenced” dog park size. Staff Mudgett responded that a typical dog park is .5 to 1 acre.
Commissioner Olson asked if receiving grant funds would preclude the City from applying for
future grants. Director Stanwyck did not believe this would have an impact on the City’s
competition for other grants.
Commissioner Schwab asked if other City Parks were considered. Staff Mudgett responded
that five potential city park locations were identified, however preliminary survey results
showed Laguna Lake Park as the top selection by survey takers. Director Stanwyck added that
having an enclosed “fenced” dog park at this location would be consistent with other uses.
Director Stanwyck provided additional information about Council’s support for an update of
Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan as part of the 2017-19 Financial Plan and future
dog park planning and long-term visioning would be a part of that future policy document and
plan.
Vice Chair Thurman asked if it made sense to have both a “fenced” and unfenced dog area
together. He was in support of more community analysis and incorporating dog park planning
into the Parks and Recreation Element update.
Commissioner Whitener as about the total cost of constructing a dog park. Staff Mudgett said
that, in collaboration with Parks Maintenance staff, it believed a dog park could be constructed
at this location for approximately $40,000 which assumes community donations of some
materials, in-kind services, volunteer efforts, and partnerships. Commissioner Whitener was in
support of the Laguna Park as a location for a “fenced” dog park. He was not in support of a
“fenced” dog park at another City park location if it took away from, or negatively impacted,
current uses.
Chair Avakian said he is a dog lover and past dog owner who often frequented the Laguna Lake
dog “off-leash” area. He supported the concept of a new dog park that had a large/small dog
separation. He appreciated knowing that the grant had flexibility in determining the exact
location of a “fenced” dog park. Chair Avakian asked if the area adjacent to the restrooms was
considered as a potential location. Director Stanwyck responded that area could encroach into
sensitive open space area and trails, and therefore was not recommended by staff.
ACTION: RECEIVE PRELIMINARY DOG OFF-LEASH SURVEY RESULTS AND
RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT IT AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PURSUE
PETSAFE® BARK FOR YOUR PARK™ GRANT, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER
OLSON, SECOND BY WHITENER.
CARRIED 3:2:0:1 to recommend to Council that it authorize staff to pursue a Bark for Your
ParkTM grant application submitted to PetSafe®for a total amount not to exceed $25,000 for
the design and construction of a new dog park at Laguna Lake Park.
AYES: AVAKIAN, OLSON, WHITENER
NOES: SCHWAB, THURMAN
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: SINGLE
COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS
Packet Pg. 65
6
DRAFT Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of June 7, 2017 Page 5
4. Director’s Report
Director Stanwyck provided a brief update of current Parks and Recreation programming and
City updates.
• Council preliminarily included an update to the Parks and Recreation Element as part of
the Preliminary 2017-19 Financial Plan. Next steps will be adoption of budget on June
20th. Following that staff will return to the PRC with to focus on identifying new and
creative ways to engage the public (who recreate and who do not) in this process as well
as to develop a project plan. Community Development planner, Rebecca Gershow, will
be assisting with this effort.
• Council provided clarifying direction to staff regarding the continued pursuit of a park in
the north of Broad Street neighborhood.
• Public Art Olas Portola installation on Friday, June 9th. Dedication planned for early
August.
• Strategic Plan Summit, sharing five months of subcommittee results on the six
Department Goals. There will be a presentation and annual report for the Commission.
• Summer Planning frenzy! Summer Camps start on June 19th with 150 kids daily.
Recreation Swim starts June 12th. Jr Ranger Camp starts June 12th. Swim lessons
provided to over 1,000 patrons. Golf program, “Free for Kids” w/ paying adult - all
summer. Blues Games are under way. Friday Night Skate at the SLO Skate Park with
music.
• Cancellation of August meeting and community whiffle-ball concept on agenda forecast.
• Sinshiemer Park Playground construction updates. Construction severely delayed by
rain, but hopeful it will be completed before the SLO triathlon in July.
• PixOnPeaks 2.0 Campaign launched June 1st and includes seven new “loop” hikes
LIAISON REPORTS
5. Subcommittee Liaison Reports
• Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Single was absent. No Report.
• Bicycle Advisory Committee: Commissioner Olson said the BAC had its annual traffic
safety report; lowest collisions on record for auto, bike related accidents up 12% (56
collisions). Half of severe injuries are due to speeding and DUIs. The BAC has not yet
concluded if it will lead the pedestrian plan. BAC will revisit at next meeting in July.
• City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Chair Avakian reported
on the new pool ambassador program. Facility staff hosts have new polo shirt uniforms.
The Golf Course has had 26,000 rounds played to-date. Golf Course added a Super
Twilight rate.
• Tree Committee: Vice Chair Thurman said there was no Tree Committee report.
• Jack House Committee: Commissioner Whitener said the Jack House meeting was a
synopsis on past, present and future of the Jack House. Most of the art is off the walls
and awaiting analysis and cataloging and preservation (as most are in various states of
deterioration). City staff is working with the groups for future Recreational Partnership
agreements, implementation of operational best practices for historic homes managing
and training for volunteers. The Jack House is now a Blue Star Museum, which allows
military and their families a free tour of the home from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
• Youth Sports: Commissioner Schwab said there was no YSA meeting.
Commission Communications
Packet Pg. 66
6
DRAFT Minutes – Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of June 7, 2017 Page 6
Vice Chair Thurman corrected the pronunciation of “Sinsheimer” as “Sins-Heimer”.
Commissioner Olson shared there is a group called “See Spot Run” that is dedicating efforts towards the
City allowing a dedicate spot or trail in open space to hike with dogs off-leash.
Director Stanwyck added that the City is starting a new program called “Hikes with Hounds”, which is a
monthly Ranger led hike in the open space in June, July and August.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m. to the regular Parks and Recreation Commission scheduled for 05,
July 2017 at 5:30 p.m., in the Parks and Recreation Department Conference Room located at 1341
Nipomo Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION: 07/05/2017
Packet Pg. 67
6
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 68
6
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk
SUBJECT: SELECTION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES - LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE
RECOMMENDATION
Appoint Mayor Heidi Harmon as the voting delegate and Council Members Pease and Gomez as
alternate voting delegates to vote on the City’s behalf at the Annual Business Meeting of the
League of California Cities on Friday, September 15, 2017.
DISCUSSION
The League of California Cities Annual Conference will be held on September 13-15, 2017 in
Sacramento. An important component of the Annual Conference is the Annual Business Meeting
scheduled for 12:30 p.m. on Friday, September 15, 2017. At this meeting, the League
membership will consider and take action on resolutions that establish League policy. In order to
vote at the Annual Business Meeting, the City Council must designate a voting delegate. Council
may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote in the event that
the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This recommended actions are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
CONCURRENCES
It is a requirement that by Council action, the City authorize delegates to represent the City at the
California Cities Annual Conference.
FISCAL IMPACT
Financial resources have been budgeted in the 2017-2018 Financial Plan for Council member
attendance at the League of California Cities Annual Conference.
Attachments:
a - 2017 League of California Cities Council Voting Delegates
Packet Pg. 69
7
Packet Pg. 70
7
Packet Pg. 71
7
Packet Pg. 72
7
Packet Pg. 73
7
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 74
7
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Timothy S. Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Works
Isaac Shuck, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor
SUBJECT: VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT SURPLUS DESIGNATION AND
AUTHORIZATION OF SALE
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the surplus designation and disposal of surplus units in accordance with the City’s
policies and procedures as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Sections 405-L, 480-
A and 480-B.
DISCUSSION
Staff has identified 15 vehicles and pieces of equipment, miscellaneous shop equipment, tools,
and parts, meeting the criteria for surplus, in accordance with the City’s Financial Management
Manual Sections 405-L, 480-A and 480-B. The vehicles, equipment, and miscellaneous items
listed below have since been replaced or no longer used and are ready to be designated as
surplus. These items have an estimated value more than $1,000 each and therefore require City
Council approval before they can be sold.
No.Asset No.Description Program
1 0025 1999 Ford F-150 Public Works
2 0133 2001 Gorman Rupp Portable Pump Utilities
3 0227 2002 Ford Taurus Public Works
4 0228 2002 Ford Taurus Public Works
5 0239 Turfco Mete-R-Matic Top Dresser Public Works
6 0316 2002 Ford Ranger Parks & Rec
7 0627 2006 Ford Crown Vic Fire
8 0723 2007 Ford F-250 Public Works
9 0807 2007 Chevrolet Impala Police
10 0815 2008 Ford F-150 Public Works
11 0821 2008 Ford F-250 Public Works
12 0838 2008 Dodge Charger Police
13 1008 2009 Toro 3100D Mower Parks & Rec
14 9821 1998 Ford Ranger Public Works
15 9905 1998 Ford F-150 Public Works
16 Lincoln Ideal Arc-250 Welder Public Works
17 4 Pallets Miscelaneous Hand Tools and Parts Public Works
Staff has identified an additional 22 vehicles that are currently in the replacement process and
will meet the criteria of surplus within the next fiscal year. Staff is seeking preapproval to
Packet Pg. 75
8
designate as surplus and be sold at auction once they have been replaced and taken ou t of active
service.
No. Asset No. Description Program
1 0123 2001 Jeep Cherokee Utilities
2 0131 2001 John Deere 4500 Utility Tractor Public Works
3 0234 2002 Ford F-550 Public Works
4 0301 2002 Ford F-150 Fire
5 0305 1998 Mitsubishi FBS20-48A Electric Forklift Public Works
6 0309 2002 Dodge D-250 Public Works
7 0403 2003 Ford Explorer 4 x 4 IT
8 0404 2003 Ford Explorer IT
9 0507 2004 Ford F-550 Utilities
10 0508 2004 Ford F-550 Utilities
11 0510 2004 Ford F-550 Public Works
12 0608 2005 Club Car Carryall Cart Public Works
No.0614 1989 Case 480 Skip Loader Public Works
13 0705 2006 Honda ST1300 Police
14 0706 2006 Honda ST1300 Police
15 0713 2007 Ford Crown Vic Police
16 1102 2007 Reliance Transfer Dump Trailer Public Works
17 1203 2011 Chevrolet Caprice Police
18 1307 2013 Ford Explorer Police
19 1308 2013 Ford Explorer Police
20 9713 1994 Freightliner Heavy Duty Dump Truck Public Works
21 STS-CRP 2001 Crafco SS125 Crack Sealer Public Works
The vehicles and equipment listed above have been or are in the process of being replaced and
removed from the active fleet record as per the City’s vehicle replacement plan. It is important that
these vehicles, once designated surplus, are sold as soon as possible due to on-going depreciation
and the costs associated with maintaining the vehicles in a condition adequate for sale.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The sale of surplus government property is exempt under CEQA Section 15312 (Class 12
exemptions) and requires no environmental review.
CONCURRENCE
The Finance Department concurs with the staff recommendation per current financial manual
policy and approved vehicle replacement schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT
Packet Pg. 76
8
Staff anticipates the sale of these surplus items will generate approximately $80,000 in revenue
after any associated advertising or auction fees. Funds generated by the sale of these surplus
items which were General Fund supported will be returned to the Fleet Replacement Fund
balance to support future purchases of replacement vehicles. Funds generated by the sale of
surplus items supported by enterprise funds will be returned to the applicable enterprise fund.
ALTERNATIVE
Deny Surplus designation and sale. The City Council could reject the surplus designation
request and direct staff to pursue vehicle rehabilitation and reutilization of the equipment, tools,
and parts. Staff does not recommend this option because these vehicles and equipment have
been or will be replaced and serve no purpose once designated as surplus. The shop equipment
and tools are no longer used, and the parts are for vehicles no longer in the City Fleet. If these
items are not sold, the City will continue to incur costs associated with maintenance, storage, and
depreciation.
Attachments:
a - Disposing of Surplus Units - Section 405-L Procedures
b - Surplus Personal and Unclaimed Property Policy - Section 480-A
c - Auction Firm Services - Section 480-B
Packet Pg. 77
8
405-17
Section 405-L: Procedures
DISPOSING OF SURPLUS UNITS
1. When a unit is replaced or otherwise permanently removed from service, report to
Accounting that it is surplus and available for sale.
2. Include in each such report the following information for each unit reported:
City identification number (e.g., 9901)
Vehicle identification number (VIN)
License number
Model year (e.g.,2005), make (e.g., Ford), and model (e.g., F-350)
Description (e.g., one-ton truck)
Assigned department (e.g., Public Works)
Assigned program (e.g., Signal and Light Maintenance)
Acquisition year (e.g., 2004-05)
Estimated surplus value
Basis of estimated surplus value (e.g., blue book, previous auction proceeds)
Current odometer or hourmeter reading
Justification for replacement
Current location
Authorization to surplus (e.g., budget document that authorized replacement or
other Council authorization to replace or dispose of the unit)
3. Finance Division will dispose of surplus vehicles in accordance Section 480 of the
Finance Management manual.
ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 78
8
480-10
Section 480-B
AUCTION FIRM SERVICES
OVERVIEW
To reduce staff time in the sale and disposal of property, to reduce the amount of space being
used to store surplus and unclaimed property, to improve the process of estimating the value of
surplus property, and to maximize the value of return on surplus property, the Department of
Finance & IT is authorized to contract with an auction firm to assist staff in the sale and disposal
of personal property, consumable supplies and unclaimed property on an "as available basis"
after authorization is given by the Council or the Director of Finance & IT to sell or dispose of
City property.
The policies and procedures provided below in conjunction with the City's auction firm will
provide the staff with the opportunity to systematize the sale and disposal of this property.
AUCTION FIRM RESPONSIBILITIES
The following responsibilities will normally be assigned to the City's auction firm by Agreement
between the City and the firm selected:
A. The auction firm will be required to pickup any and all "marketable" surplus property by
consignment and deliver this property to their premises where it shall be inventoried,
sorted, identified, and catalogued. An auction will be conducted within 30 days of
receipt of property and supplies.
B. The auction firm will make the necessary arrangements for offering the property for sale
by auction to the most qualified buyers to obtain the highest return possible. The auction
firm will advertise the auction in a manner that will obtain the maximum participation by
the public in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the City of San Luis Obispo
for a minimum of five days prior to a scheduled auction.
C. The property consigned to the auction firm will remain the property of the City until sold
or disposed in accordance with these procedures.
D. Property not sold at auction will be disposed by on of the following methods:
1. Consignment to a sub-contractor specializing in unique or special equipment and
material for which there is no local market.
2. Direct sale to a buyer of unique or special equipment and material for which there
is no local market.
3. By sale as salvage to a local dealer or any recycling firm.
4. By destruction at an appropriate landfill site and certification thereto.
5. Returned to the City.
E. The material and equipment not sold at auction will be disposed of by one of the methods
described above within 15 days from the date offered at auction. For the purpose of these
ATTACHMENT 1
Packet Pg. 79
8
Section 480-A
SURPLUS PERSONAL AND UNCLAIMED PROPERTY POLICY
OVERVIEW
This policy addresses the procedures for the disposal of surplus personal property, unclaimed
property, consumable supplies, and junk. The policies and procedures for the disposal or sale of
surplus real property, abandoned property and resale inventory are provided in other policy
documents.
In preparing this policy, not all issues or exceptions could be anticipated. Accordingly, the
guidance given in this policy does not relieve Staff from exercising good judgment in their
stewardship of the City's property resources. Whenever there is a question or doubt between the
guidance provided in this policy and the good judgment expected of a prudent person, good
judgment should always be the prevailing standard, with this policy as a minimum standard.
LEGISLATIVE POLICY
A. Surplus Property
Section 906 of the City Charter provides that the Council must approve the sale of
surplus property (real or personal) with an estimated value greater than $1,000.
B. Unclaimed Property
1. Chapter 3.32 of the City Municipal Code provides for the disposal of unclaimed
property by the Chief of Police. This property must be held for a minimum of
four months and notice of sale must be given at least five days prior to sale by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation. Property not sold may be
destroyed by the Police Department after public auction.
2. Sections 2080.4 and 2080.6 of the Civil Code requires any person finding
property valued at $10.00 or more to turn the property over to the Police
Department within a reasonable time, stating when and where the property was
found and providing a description of the property. If the property was saved, a
statement is required from the "finder" describing:
a.From what and how it was saved.
b. Whether the owner of the property is known to the "finder".
c.That the property has not been secreted, withheld, or partially disposed.
480-1
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 80
8
Surplus Personal and Unclaimed Property Policy
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY
A. The Director of Finance & Information Technology (IT) is authorized to declare as
surplus those items of personal property and consumable supplies estimated to be less
than $1,000 in value; Council approval is required to declare personal and consumable
supplies as surplus with a value of $1,000.
B. Department Heads are authorized to approve the disposal of property that is essentially
without value due to technical obsolescence or its unrepairable (or economically
unrepairable) condition. Department Heads may dispose of such junk property in the
manner they deem most appropriate, consistent with other rules, regulations, and the
City's ethics policy.
C. Generally, estimating the value of surplus property is made by the Department Head or
designated representative. In unique and unusual cases, Finance will assist Departments
in estimating the value of property by using the City's auction firm to provide a
professional estimate. However, in all cases, the Department Head must approve in
writing the estimated value of the property to be sold or otherwise disposed.
D. The Director of Finance & IT is authorized to sell, transfer, trade, or otherwise dispose of
surplus personal property, consumable supplies, or unclaimed property in the most cost
effective manner. Normally the sale of this property will be at auction with a firm
contracted to provide the following services:
1. Sell and dispose of personal property, consumable supplies and unclaimed
property at auction.
2. Provide professional estimates as to the value of personal property and
consumable supplies when required.
3. Assist in the sale of unique or special property and consumable supplies that
requires the use of a "specialty house" to sell or dispose of the property.
4. Dispose of unsaleable property, supplies and equipment at an approved disposal
site.
E. The Director of Finance & IT may dispose of surplus property and supplies by transfer to
another local government agency or non-profit organization based on the
recommendation of a Department Head. Although there may be circumstances where it
is appropriate to make such transfer without compensation, cash or in-kind services
should generally be received in an amount equal to or greater than the estimated value
provided by the City's auction firm or the Department Head. In the case of vehicles, "low
blue book value" may also be considered.
F. When it is a normal business practice, trade value should be obtained to determine the
most cost effective method of disposal and as a standard by which to evaluate the
services of the City's auction firm. There may be circumstances when trade value of
480-2
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 81
8
Surplus Personal and Unclaimed Property Policy
property may exceed auction value, in which case the Director of Finance & IT may
authorize the trade of surplus property versus sale at auction based on the
recommendation of the appropriate Department head.
G. Advertising the sale of the City's property and unclaimed property will be made by the
City's auction firm in accordance with these procedures, the Auction Services
Agreement, and legislative policy. Accordingly, the advertising must disclose that the
property for sale at auction is either the surplus property of the City of San Luis Obispo
or is unclaimed property in the possession of the City and it must state the date and time
of sale. Property sold at auction will be advertised at least five days in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City of San Luis Obispo.
H. Property determined to be unclaimed by the Chief of Police may be sold at public auction
in accordance with these policies and procedures under the following conditions:
1. It is a thing which is commonly the subject of sale.
2. The owner cannot (with reasonable diligence) be found.
3. The owner, if identified, refuses to pay the reasonable charges incurred by the
City for storing and safeguarding of the property.
PROCEDURES
A. Surplus Personal Property and Consumable Supplies
1. Department Heads will identify personal property and supplies that are surplus to
their needs and notify the Director of Finance & IT by Memorandum to sell or
dispose of property identified, in accordance with City policy and procedures.
The property to be declared surplus will be listed and include the City Asset
Number (if applicable), a descriptive name of the property, quantity, pickup
location, estimated value, and name of the contract person with their extension
number. Separate memorandums must be prepared for property estimated to
exceed $1,000 in value and for property estimated to be less than $1,000 in value.
The memorandum (or listing) must indicate why the property is no longer
required.
2. Department Heads may request that Finance assist them in estimating the value of
personal property and consumable supplies. In such instances, Finance may
request the services of the City's auction firm in estimating these values.
However, these services are limited and should not be used except for unique and
unusual property.
3. Special handling will be required for the disposal of toxic and hazardous
materials, and should be coordinated with the City's Fire Department.
480-3
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 82
8
Surplus Personal and Unclaimed Property Policy
I. After receipt of a request to dispose of personal property and consumable supplies
from a Department Head, Finance will circulate the list of property to other City
Departments as an advisory memorandum. The property listed may be claimed
by other Departments on a first come first serve basis. After 10 days from the
date of the advisory memorandum, this listing will be forwarded to the Housing
Authority, San Luis Coastal Unified School District, and United Way for their
information. If none of these agencies expresses interest in the remaining
property items within 10 days of receiving the listing, then the property will be
consigned to the City's auction firm for sale or other method of disposal as
determined by the Director of Finance & IT. Except in unusual circumstances,
surplus property will generally remain on site pending its final disposition. This
means that it is the responsibility of the interested party to make arrangements
with the disposing department to view the property, discuss its condition, and
coordinate any terms of transfer such as price, timing, and transportation.
J. For property with a value of $1,000 or more, the Director of Finance & IT will
prepare an Agenda Report for Council approval to declare the property as surplus
after review by the operating departments as described above and prior to the
consignment of property to the City's auction firm.
B. Evidence
The provisions of this policy do not address the disposal of property which is classified
as evidence. Evidence is governed by the provisions of the penal code and must be dealt
with accordingly. For example, evidence may be returned to the owner, subjected to lien,
or classed as contraband and accordingly destroyed. However, evidence may also be
determined by the Chief of Police to be unclaimed property and, in that event, will be
processed in accordance with the policies and procedures provided below.
C. Unclaimed Property
Unclaimed property received by the City will be processed as follows:
1. The Police Department is required to receive, hold, and safekeep all property
valued at more than $10 that is found within the City limits and turned in to the
Police Department for safekeeping. The owner will be notified as to where the
property may be claimed if the owner's identity can reasonably be determined.
2. If the owner appears within 120 days after receipt of the property by the Police
Department, proves ownership, and pays all reasonable charges, the Police
Department will return the property to the owner.
3. If the reported value of the property is fifty dollars or more (and no owner appears
and proves ownership within 120 days), the Police Department will publish a
notice, at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation. After seven days
following the first published notice the following actions will be taken if no
owner appears and proves ownership of the property;
480-4
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 83
8
Surplus Personal and Unclaimed Property Policy
G. If the property was found in the course of employment by a City employee, the
property shall be sold at public auction.
H. The title shall vest in the person who found the property if he or she is
willing to pay the cost of the publication.
I. If the reported value of the property is less than $50 and no owner appears
and proves ownership of the property within 120 days, the title shall vest
in the person who found the property, unless the property was found in the
course of employment by a City employee, in which case the property
shall be sold at public auction.
J. Generally, the sale of unclaimed property will be made by the City's
auction firm; however, in unique circumstances, the Chief of Police may
request that Police Department staff conduct the auction. When the City's
auction firm is used, the firm must be notified in writing with a list of
property to be sold. This list does not require a statement of estimated
values. The letter will give the name of the contact person and extension
number, a short title property description, a pickup location, and a pickup
time.
K. Prior to sale, a listing of unclaimed property shall be provided to the
Director of Finance & IT, who will circulate this list as an advisory
memorandum to other City Departments. The property listed may be
claimed by other Departments on a first come first serve basis. After a 15
day period from the date of the advisory memorandum, the unclaimed
property will be available for sale at public auction according to policy.
L. The unclaimed property to be sold by the City's auction firm will be
transferred on consignment in accordance with the surplus property
policies.
M. Any property remaining unsold after being offered at public auction may
be destroyed or otherwise disposed of by the City's auction firm.
Approved by the City Manager on March 1, 1990; revised on January 14, 1994.
480-5
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 84
8
Section 480-B
AUCTION FIRM SERVICES
OVERVIEW
To reduce staff time in the sale and disposal of property, to reduce the amount of space being
used to store surplus and unclaimed property, to improve the process of estimating the value of
surplus property, and to maximize the value of return on surplus property, the Department of
Finance & IT is authorized to contract with an auction firm to assist staff in the sale and disposal
of personal property, consumable supplies and unclaimed property on an "as available basis"
after authorization is given by the Council or the Director of Finance & IT to sell or dispose of
City property.
The policies and procedures provided below in conjunction with the City's auction firm will
provide the staff with the opportunity to systematize the sale and disposal of this property.
AUCTION FIRM RESPONSIBILITIES
The following responsibilities will normally be assigned to the City's auction firm by Agreement
between the City and the firm selected:
A. The auction firm will be required to pickup any and all "marketable" surplus property by
consignment and deliver this property to their premises where it shall be inventoried,
sorted, identified, and catalogued. An auction will be conducted within 30 days of
receipt of property and supplies.
B. The auction firm will make the necessary arrangements for offering the property for sale
by auction to the most qualified buyers to obtain the highest return possible. The auction
firm will advertise the auction in a manner that will obtain the maximum participation by
the public in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the City of San Luis Obispo
for a minimum of five days prior to a scheduled auction.
C. The property consigned to the auction firm will remain the property of the City until sold
or disposed in accordance with these procedures.
D. Property not sold at auction will be disposed by on of the following methods:
1. Consignment to a sub-contractor specializing in unique or special equipment and
material for which there is no local market.
2. Direct sale to a buyer of unique or special equipment and material for which there
is no local market.
3.By sale as salvage to a local dealer or any recycling firm.
4. By destruction at an appropriate landfill site and certification thereto.
5. Returned to the City.
E. The material and equipment not sold at auction will be disposed of by one of the methods
described above within 15 days from the date offered at auction. For the purpose of these
480-10
Auction Firm Services
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 85
8
instructions, the City will give approval as to the disposal method based on the
recommendation of the auction firm and the method that is in the best interests of the
City.
F. The auction firm will provide the Department of Finance & IT with a list of consigned
property with a check for the net proceeds from the auction or specialty sale within 60
days of receipt of consigned material and equipment providing the following information:
1. City Asset number (if available)
2. Short title description of the property
3. Date of sale or disposal
4. Purchaser or the disposal site
5. Total purchase price
6. Auction fee
7. Net to City
8. Method of disposal (sale at auction, transfer to a specialty house for sale, direct
sale as salvage, transfer to an appropriate landfill or disposal site, return to City)
480-11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 86
8
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Steve Schmidt, Information Technology Manager
SUBJECT: ESRI ENTERPRISE LICENSE AGREEMENT EXTENSION
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an agreement with Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Inc. for a three-year
Small Government Enterprise License Agreement (ELA) in the amount of $105,000 payable on an
annual basis at $35,000 per year.
DISCUSSION
The City of San Luis Obispo utilizes ESRI software application products for all the City’s
Geographic Information System (GIS) software needs. The ESRI-ELA provides:
1. Unlimited number of licenses for ArcGIS Desktop.
2. Unlimited number of licenses for ArcGIS Server.
3. Unlimited number of licenses for extensions used in ArcGIS desktop and ArcGIS Server.
4. Technical support and software maintenance.
5. Discounts on instructor led training and free online trainings
The continuation of the ESRI-ELA is required to continue to provide critical GIS services used
throughout the City. All GIS analysis performed by the GIS staff is done using ESRI software.
ESRI GIS software is required for citywide enterprise software systems such as Cityworks,
Springbrook and EnerGov. In addition, the Police and Fire dispatch CAD/RMS system utilizes
ESRI for their critical Spillman incident mapping, Crime Analysis, Automatic Vehicle Location and
Quickest Route systems.
Background/Sole Source Justification
The City has exclusively utilized ESRI GIS software applications since 1995. ESRI is the only
vendor that provides the GIS systems that the City requires to power all the critical major
enterprise systems, which are now all GIS centric. ESRI software solutions meets all the City’s
needs and continues to mature to meet new technology changes and requirements
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The requested actions are not subject to CEQA.
CONCURRENCES
All City Departments are supported directly or indirectly through GIS and support the
recommendation.
Packet Pg. 87
9
FISCAL IMPACT
Continuing the ESRI-ELA for an additional three years will cost $35,000 for each year of the
three-year contract for a total of $105,000. The Information Technology Division’s budget includes
funding for ESRI licensing and has sufficient funding in the operating budget to cover the expense.
ALTERNATIVES
Do not approve the sole source purchase. This alternative is not recommended as without the
ESRI - ELA, the City cannot maintain and support the current level of critical GIS services.
Attachments:
a - ERSI ELA Agreement
b - ESRI ELA Quote
Packet Pg. 88
9
Packet Pg. 89
9
Packet Pg. 90
9
Packet Pg. 91
9
Packet Pg. 92
9
Packet Pg. 93
9
Packet Pg. 94
9
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Scott Lee, Parking Services Manager
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR LICENSE PLATE
RECOGNITION (LPR), SPECIFICATION NO 91547
RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for License Plate Recognition
System (LPR), Specification No. 91547; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with the successful bidder within
authorized project budget not to exceed $145,000, and
3. Authorize the City Attorney to approve modifications to the form of the contract with the
successful bidder.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this project is to assist the Parking Services Division in the identification of
vehicles to determine whether the vehicle has exceeded the all owed parking time permitted at
its current location or has the proper permit for a given area . The project will also assist in the
data collection necessary to update and maintain the Park + model currently used by the city.
This system will gather and process vehicle parking data far more efficiently than the manual
collection processes currently utilized by Parking Services. Mobile license plate reader systems
use image processing technology to identify vehicles through their license plates, and uses
cameras to capture images of the front and/or rear of a vehicle. This will allow parking
enforcement officers to effectively enforce the parking laws of the city. The system will use
real-time database matching which is helpful in stolen vehicle enforcem ent and other similar
police enforcement actions and this information will be routed directly to the police department.
Information will be gathered, processed and stored electronically and will be used for
enforcement, occupancy and parking trend analysi s. The information will only be retained in
the system for the time period needed and then will automatically be deleted.
While LPR is intended primarily for enforcement purposes, this technology will also automate
the collection efforts and improve accuracy of the data used to update the Kimley-Horn Park +
model currently being used by Parking Services. Data can also be gathered to assist in the
determination of whether an area should have parking restrictions added (i.e. meters, time
limits, etc.) and will allow these determinations to be made faster and with more complete
information.
Funding in the amount of $135,000 was approved in FY15 -16 and an additional $10,000 was
approved in FY16-17.
Packet Pg. 95
10
NEXT STEPS
Solicitation for proposals will be done by publicizing the RFP in various parking industry
periodicals and websites, in addition to local notification required by the City’s Municipal and
Public Resource Codes.
The RFP is scheduled to be released to the public upon approval by Council. After proposals are
received and accepted by the City in August 2017, a team of City staff will review each proposal
for conformity and “best value”. The top ranked firm(s) will be invited to formal interviews to
highlight their capabilities, provide demonstrations of their products and services and to make
recommendations to staff about the specific configuration and equipment necessary to meet the
city’s needs. Negotiations will then begin with the top ranked firm. The new contract will
become effective and work will begin shortly after approval and award.
CONCURRENCES
Public Works Transportation and SLOPD concur with this RFP.
ENVIRIONMENTAL REVIEW
The recommended actions are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
FISCAL IMPACT
Currently the authorized project budget is $145,000. The project is proposed to be funded by
Parking Fund. The anticipated annual cost for the support and maintenance of the new system
will be included in the operating expenses budget annually.
ALTERNATIVES
Alternative 1: The City Council may choose to not approve the RFP for the LPR system and
instruct Staff to continue to manually enforce all parking regulations and manually collect data
for updating the Park + model and seek other alternatives. The Parking Manager and staff do not
recommend this alternative as this option is time consuming and does not improve the overall
capabilities of the division.
Attachments:
a - 2017 Mobile LPR RFP
Packet Pg. 96
10
Page 1 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Notice Requesting Proposals for
MOBILE LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION SYSTEM (LPR)
Specification No. 91547
The City of San Luis Obispo is soliciting proposals from qualified vendors for a Mobile License
Plate Recognition System, pursuant to Specification No. 91547. All proposals must be received
by the Finance Department, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA no later than 3:30
p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, August 17, 2017.
Proposals received after said date and time will not be considered. To guard against premature
opening, each proposal shall be submitted to the Finance Department in a sealed envelope
plainly marked with the proposer’s name, specification number, proposal title and due date of
proposal opening. Hard copied proposals shall be submitted along with the required forms
provided in the specification package and following instructions contained herein.
Proposals packages may be obtained at either:
The City’s website: www.SLOCity.org – Doing Business – Bids & Proposals Page; or a
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/public-works/public-works-bids-proposals
Additional information may be obtained by contacting:
Scott Lee, Parking Manager, (805) 781-7234 or slee@slocity.org
Nicole Lawson, Supervising Administrative Assistant, (805) 781-7059 or nlawson@slocity.org
For Public Records requests see Section 1.14
Packet Pg. 97
10
Page 2 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Specification No. 91547
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. NOTICE TO PROPOSERS – PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................. 5
1.1. Summary and Requirement to Meet All Provisions ......................................................................... 5
1.2. Contract Term and Optional Extensions .......................................................................................... 5
1.3. Important Dates ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.4. Proposal Submittal and Format ....................................................................................................... 5
1.5. Labeling ............................................................................................................................................ 5
1.6. Insurance Certificate ........................................................................................................................ 5
1.7. Submittal of References ................................................................................................................... 6
1.8. Statement of Contract Disqualifications .......................................................................................... 6
1.9. Withdrawal or Revision of Proposals ............................................................................................... 6
1.10. Multiple Proposals ........................................................................................................................... 6
1.11. Procuring Agency/Personnel ............................................................................................................ 6
1.12. Inquiries and Clarifications ............................................................................................................... 6
1.13. Addenda ........................................................................................................................................... 7
1.14. Public Records .................................................................................................................................. 7
2. CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION ................................................................................... 7
2.1. Proposal Retention and Award ........................................................................................................ 7
2.2. Competency and Responsibility of Proposer ................................................................................... 7
2.3. Form of Agreement .......................................................................................................................... 7
2.4. Insurance .......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.5. Business License and Tax .................................................................................................................. 8
2.6. Failure to Accept Contract ................................................................................................................ 8
2.7. Oral Presentations / Site Visits / Meetings ....................................................................................... 8
2.8. Proposer’s Responsibility ................................................................................................................. 8
3. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE...................................................................................................... 8
3.1. Ability to Perform ............................................................................................................................. 8
3.2. Laws to be Observed ........................................................................................................................ 8
3.3. Payment of Taxes ............................................................................................................................. 8
Packet Pg. 98
10
Page 3 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
3.4. Permits and Licenses ........................................................................................................................ 9
3.5. Safety Provisions .............................................................................................................................. 9
3.6. Public and Employee Safety ............................................................................................................. 9
3.7. Preservation of City Property ........................................................................................................... 9
3.8. Immigration Act of 1986 .................................................................................................................. 9
3.9. Proposer Non-Discrimination .......................................................................................................... 9
3.10. Work Delays ..................................................................................................................................... 9
3.11. Payment Terms .............................................................................................................................. 10
3.12. Inspection ....................................................................................................................................... 10
3.13. Audit ............................................................................................................................................... 10
3.14. Interests of Proposer ...................................................................................................................... 10
3.15. Hold Harmless and Indemnification ............................................................................................... 10
3.16. Contract Assignment ...................................................................................................................... 10
3.17. Termination .................................................................................................................................... 10
4. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND SELECTION PROCESS ............................................................. 11
4.1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 11
4.2. Calendar of Events ......................................................................................................................... 11
4.3. Background .................................................................................................................................... 12
4.4. Objectives ....................................................................................................................................... 12
4.5. Functional and Technical Requirements ........................................................................................ 12
4.6. Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................ 13
4.7. Selection Process ............................................................................................................................ 13
5. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AND CONTENT OF PROPOSALS .............................................. 13
Chapter 1: Title Page ...................................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 2: Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 3: Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 4: Project Manager ........................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 5: Organizational Experience ........................................................................................... 14
Chapter 6: Organizational Chart and Project Team ...................................................................... 14
Chapter 7: References ......................................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 8: Customer Service and Technical Support ..................................................................... 14
Chapter 9: Sub Proposers ............................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 10: System Specifications ................................................................................................. 14
Packet Pg. 99
10
Page 4 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Chapter 11: Implementation .......................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 12: Risks ............................................................................................................................ 15
Chapter 13: Disclosure of Past Contract Failures and Litigation .................................................... 15
Chapter 14: Proposer’s Financial Stability Assurance .................................................................... 15
Chapter 15: Fee Proposal ............................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 16: Additional Required Forms ......................................................................................... 17
REQUIRED FORMS ................................................................................................ 18
FORM A: SIGNATURE AFFIDAVIT ......................................................................................................... 18
FORM B: VENDOR PROFILE ............................................................................................................ 19
FORM C: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 20
FORM D: STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS ................................................ 23
FORM E: COST PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORM .............................................................................. 24
FORM F: OPTIONAL COST PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORM ............................................................. 25
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 26
APPENDIX A: SAMPLE AGREEMENT ............................................................................................... 26
APPENDIX B: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 28
APPENDIX C: FUNCTIONAL AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS ...................................................... 30
Packet Pg. 100
10
Page 5 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
1 NOTICE TO PROPOSERS – PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
1.1 Summary and Requirement to Meet All Provisions
The City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is soliciting proposals from qualified vendors for a
Mobile License Plate Recognition System (LPR). Vendors submitting proposals
(“Proposers”) are required to read this Request for Proposals (“RFP”) in its entirety and
follow the instructions contained herein and shall meet all of the terms, and conditions of
the RFP specifications package. By virtue of its proposal submittal, the Proposer
acknowledges agreement with and acceptance of all provisions of the RFP specifications.
1.2 Contract Term and Optional Extensions
This shall be a Contract for Purchase of Services (Appendix A) for the purchase, installation,
implementation, training, configuration, and services related to the implementation, with
an end date coinciding with completion and acceptance of the implementation services. A
separate Contract for Purchase of Services for the future maintenance and support services,
which may be annual and renewable of for a set number of years will be required.
1.3 Important Dates
Deliver proposals no later than the due date and time indicated below. The City will reject
late proposals:
Issue Date: July 21, 2017
Due Date: August 17, 2017, 3:30PM, PDT
1.4 Proposal Submittal and Format
Each proposal must be submitted in hard copy form (i.e. printed) with a total of five (5)
copies provided in the order provided in the specifications and accompanied by any other
required submittals or supplemental materials. Proposal documents shall be enclosed in
an envelope that shall be sealed and addressed to:
Finance Department
Attn: Lorraine Colleran
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
No FAX submittals will be accepted.
1.5 Labeling
All proposals must be clearly labeled:
Proposer’s Name and Address: ________________________
Specification # 91547
Title: Mobile License Plate Recognition System
DUE: August 17, 2017, 3:30pm, PDT
1.6 Insurance Certificate
Each proposal must include a certificate of insurance showing:
A. The insurance carrier and its A.M. Best rating.
Packet Pg. 101
10
Page 6 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
B. Scope of coverage and limits.
C. Deductibles and self-insured retention.
The purpose of the submittal is to generally assess the adequacy of the Proposer’s
insurance coverage during proposal evaluation; as discussed below, endorsements are not
required until contract award. The insurance requirements are detailed in Section 2.4.
1.7 Submittal of References
Each proposer shall submit a minimum of three (3) references on the form provide in the
RFP package as Form C.
1.8 Statement of Contract Disqualifications
Each Proposer shall submit a statement regarding any past government disqualifications on
the form provide in the RFP package as Form D.
1.9 Withdrawal or Revision of Proposals
Proposers may, without prejudice, withdraw proposals by requesting such withdrawal prior
to the time specified for the proposal opening, by submitting a written request to the Bid
Administrator for its withdrawal, in which event the proposal will be returned to the
Proposer unopened. All proposals will be opened and declared publicly. Proposers may
modify their proposal at any time prior to the due date and time of submission for
proposals.
1.10 Multiple Proposals
Multiple proposals from Proposers are NOT permitted.
1.11 Procuring Agency/ Personnel
The City of San Luis Obispo is the procuring agency:
Scott Lee, Parking Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-7234
slee@SLOCity.org
The City of San Luis Obispo Finance Department administers the procurement function:
Lorraine Colleran (Bid Administrator)
Finance Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 781-7435
LColleran@SLOCity.org
1.12 Inquiries and Clarifications
Proposers are to raise any questions they have about the RFP document without delay.
Direct any questions concerning due dates and/or actual submittals to the bid administrator
either by phone or in writing. Direct all technical questions, those concerning specifications
and/or scope of work, to the procuring agency, either by phone or in writing.
Furthermore, Proposers finding any significant ambiguity, error, conflict, discrepancy,
omission, or other deficiency in this RFP document shall immediately notify the procuring
agency and request clarification.
Packet Pg. 102
10
Page 7 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
1.13 Addenda
In the event it is necessary to provide additional clarification or revision to the RFP, the
City will post addenda to the City website and to EBIDBOARD.COM website. It is Proposer’s
sole responsibility to regularly monitor the websites for any such postings. Failure to
retrieve addenda and include their provisions may result in disqualification.
1.14 Public Records
Proposers are hereby notified that all information submitted in response to this RFP may
be made available for public inspection according to the Public Records Act of the State of
California and the California Constitution. Information qualifying as a “trade secret” –
defined in California Public Records Act of 2004 – may be held confidential. Proposers shall
seal separately and clearly identify all information they deem to be “trade secrets,” as
defined by the State of California Statutes. Do not duplicate or comingle information,
deemed confidential and sealed, elsewhere in your response.
The City cannot ensure that information will not be subject to release if a request is made
under applicable public records laws. The City cannot consider the following confidential:
a bid in its entirety, price bid information, or the entire contents of any resulting contract.
The City will not provide advanced notice to Proposers prior to release of any requested
record.
To the extent permitted by such laws, it is the intention of the City to withhold the contents
of proposals from public view – until such time as competitive or bargaining reasons no
longer require non-disclosure, in the City’s opinion. At that time, all proposals will be
available for review in accordance with such laws.
2 CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION
2.1 Proposal Retention and Award
The City reserves the right to retain all proposals for a period of 180 days for examination
and comparison. The City also reserves the right to waive non-substantial irregularities in
any proposal, to reject any or all proposals, to reject or delete one part of a proposal and
accept the other, except to the extent that proposals are qualified by specific limitations.
2.2 Competency and Responsibility of Proposer
The City reserves full discretion to determine the competence and responsibility,
professionally and/or financial stability, of Proposer. Proposer will provide, in a timely
manner, all information that the City deems necessary to make such a decision.
2.3 Form of Agreement
Proposers are responsible for reviewing this Form of Agreement prior to submission of their
proposal. The Form of Agreement shall serve as the basis for the contract resulting from
this RFP. The terms of this template contract shall become contractual obligations following
award of the RFP. By submitting a proposal, the contract shall become contractual
obligations following award of the RFP. By submitting a proposal, Proposers affirm their
willingness to enter into a contract containing these terms.
Packet Pg. 103
10
Page 8 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
2.4 Insurance
Proposers shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages and amounts specified in
Appendix B of these specifications within ten (10) calendar days after notice of contract
award as a precondition to contract execution.
2.5 Business License and Tax
The Proposer must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business license and tax certificate
before execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business tax
program may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134.
2.6 Failure to Accept Contract
The following will occur if the Consultant to whom the award is made (Consultant) fails to
enter into the contract: the award will be annulled; any bid security will be forfeited in
accordance with the special terms and conditions if a Consultant's bond or security is
required; and an award may be made to the next highest ranked Consultant with whom a
responsible compensation is negotiated, who shall fulfill every stipulation as if it were the
party to whom the first award was made.
2.7 Oral Presentations / Site Visits / Meetings
Proposers may be asked to attend meetings, make oral presentations, inspect City locations
or make their facilities, or those of existing clients with similar operations, available for site
inspection as part of the RFP process. Such presentations, meetings, or site visits will be at
the Proposer’s expense.
2.8 Proposer’s Responsibility
Proposers shall examine this RFP and shall exercise their judgment as to the nature and
scope of the work required. No plea of ignorance concerning conditions or difficulties that
exist or may hereafter arise in the execution of the work under the resulti ng contract, as a
consequence of failure to make necessary examinations and investigations, shall be
accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the Proposers to fulfill the
requirements of the resulting contract.
3 CONTRACT PERFORMANCE
3.1 Ability to Perform
The Proposer warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through subcontracts, all capital
and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry out and complete
the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, county, city, and special
district laws, ordinances, and regulations.
3.2 Laws to be Observed
The Proposer shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and comply with all
applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San Luis Obi spo ordinances,
regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work.
3.3 Payment of Taxes
The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that the Proposer is required
to pay.
Packet Pg. 104
10
Page 9 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
3.4 Permits and Licenses
The Proposer shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all
notices necessary.
3.5 Safety Provisions
The Proposer shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by
OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.
3.6 Public and Employee Safety
Whenever the Proposer's operations create a condition hazardous to the public or City
employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect and maintain
such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take such
other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the
public and employees.
3.7 Preservation of City Property
The Proposer shall provide and install suitable safeguards, approved by the City, to protect
City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or damaged resulting from
the Proposer's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Proposer's expense. The
facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as g ood as when the Proposer began
work.
3.8 Immigration Act of 1986
The Proposer warrants on behalf of itself and all sub Proposers engaged for the
performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States
pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall
be employed in the performance of the work hereunder.
3.9 Proposer Non-Discrimination
In the performance of this work, the Proposer agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit
such sub Proposers as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons
because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or religion
of such persons.
3.10 Work Delays
Should the Proposer be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done hereunder
by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire,
earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or
labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then
the time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be extended for such periods as may
be agreed upon by the City and the Proposer. In the event that there is insufficient time to
grant such extensions prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time
of acceptance of the work, waive liquidated damages that may have accrued for failure to
complete on time, due to any of the above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for
such delay, and making a finding as to the causes of same.
Packet Pg. 105
10
Page 10 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
3.11 Payment Terms
Payments will be made consistent with the Agreement. The City's standard payment terms
are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the
materials, supplies, equipment or services provided by the Proposer (Net 30).
3.12 Inspection
The Proposer shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that
the services of the Proposer are being performed in accordance with the requirements and
intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject
to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Proposer
of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements.
3.13 Audit
The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written
materials used by Proposer in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any
payment to Proposer.
3.14 Interests of Proposer
The Proposer covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any
interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any manner or degree with
the performance of the work hereunder. The Proposer further covenants that, in the
performance of this work, no sub Proposer or person having such an interest shall be
employed. The Proposer certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in
performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly agreed
that, in the performance of the work hereunder, the Proposer shall at all times be deemed
an independent Proposer and not an agent or employee of the City.
3.15 Hold Harmless and Indemnification
The Proposer agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold the City and its agent s, officers
and employees harmless from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established
for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to the Proposer's
employees, agents or officers that arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed
to be caused by the acts or omissions of the Proposer, and its agents, officers or employees,
in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending
against same; provided, however, that the Proposer's duty to indemnify and hold harmless
shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful
misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees.
3.16 Contract Assignment
The Proposer shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the contract, or its
right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or business
entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City.
3.17 Termination
If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Proposer is not faithfully
abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Proposer in
writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the Pro poser a 10 (ten)
calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency.
Packet Pg. 106
10
Page 11 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
If the Proposer has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days
specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may
terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Proposer to said effect.
Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights
under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Proposer's surety shall
remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner
waived by the termination thereof.
In said event, the Proposer shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its ser vices
performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the
City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's
damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or
services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the
Proposer as may be set forth in the Agreement payment schedule; compensation for any
other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Proposer shall be based solely
on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the overall work
scope.
The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed
abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to
permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the Proposer
be entitled to receive any amount in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal.
4 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND SELECTION PROCESS
4.1 Overview
The City of San Luis Obispo (“City”) is soliciting proposals from qualified vendors
(“Proposers”) for a Mobile License Plate Recognition System (LPR). The Mobile License Plate
Recognition System shall function in the manner described herein.
The City requires well-managed and financially sound Proposers with demonstrated skills,
technical ability, and high levels of customer service and satisfaction, to fulfill the
requirements outlined in this RFP. Proposers must have at least five years of experience
with, and provide references demonstrating relevant services were provided. Only those
firms with verifiable experience in LPR will be considered during this proposal process.
4.2 Calendar of Events
Listed below are specific and estimated dates and times of RFP events, all of which are
subject to change. Proposers must complete events by specific dates as indicated unless
revised by the City. The City may or may not issue a formal notification for changes in
estimated dates and times.
Packet Pg. 107
10
Page 12 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Figure 4-2: Calendar of Events
Date Event
Friday, July 21, 2017 Issue date of RFP
Thursday August 17, 2017 3:30pm PST Proposals due
August 2017 Evaluation of proposals
September 2017 Interviews and Recommendations
September 2017 Negotiation and recommend Vendor
October 2017 Contract Routing to City Council
October 2017 Contract Award
November 2017
Contract begins
4.3 Background
The City of San Luis Parking Services Division has conducted manual on-street parking
studies on metered blocks. Data gathered includes whether a vehicle is present, whether
the meter is paid, and whether the space is out-of-service. Manual on-street studies are
also conducted on non-metered blocks on an as-needed basis to examine adherence to
time limits, residency in permit areas and to evaluate the potential for adding metered or
timed parking. Manual on-street and off-street parking studies are also carried out by staff
to determine whether a vehicle has overstayed the 72-hour maximum allowed for transient
customers.
4.4 Objectives
Due to the need to more efficiently gather parking data, the City of San Luis Obispo Parking
Services seeks a mobile License Plate Recognition system (LPR). The City has recently
purchased the Park+ parking analysis software from Kimley-Horn and Associates.
The objective of this RFP is to contract with a qualified proposer to provide an integrated,
efficient, functional and reliable “state of the art” mobile LPR system to provide sufficient
parking data for this software, and a means of gathering on-street parking data more
efficiently than the manual studies the Parking staff has done in the past. Similarly, more
efficient means of gathering off-street parking data are desired to better manage off-street
facilities.
4.5 Functional and Technical Requirements
The required Functional and Technical Requirements are further described in Appendix C:
Functional and Technical Requirements.
Packet Pg. 108
10
Page 13 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Appendix C includes a list of the features the City requires to be provided in the Mobile LPR
System. This list may be amended by the City without notice.
4.6 Scope of Work
Not applicable
4.7 Selection Process
The City may shortlist up to four (4) Proposers based on the submitted proposals
and invite them to an interview process. In addition, the Cit y may request that
Proposers demonstrate their product either as part of the interview process or
separately from it. The City, at its discretion, may make site visits to locations where
the Proposers systems are in use. The Proposers shall be evaluated on the following:
o Understanding of the work required by the City;
o Quality, clarity and responsiveness of the proposal;
o Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for
successfully performing the work required by the City;
o Recent experience in successfully performing similar services;
o Proposed approach in completing the work;
o References;
o Background and experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this
project; and
o Presentation Interviews.
As reflected above, contract award will not be based solely on price, but on a combination
of the factors determined to be in the best interest of the City. After evaluating the
proposals and discussing them further with the finalists or the tentatively selected
Proposers, the City reserves the right to further negotiate the proposed work and/or
method and amount of compensation. Once prospective Proposers have been evaluated
by the evaluation panel, negotiations shall begin. If negotiations are unsuccessful, talks
with that Proposer will be abandoned and negotiations will then commence with the next
qualified Proposer, and so on, until a final agreement has been reached and a contract
prepared. Staff will present their findings to the City Council, which, at its discretion, will
award a contact.
5. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AND CONTENT OF PROPOSALS
Proposing companies desiring to respond to this Request for Proposal (RFP) shall submit their
proposal in sufficient detail to allow for a thorough evaluation and comparative analysis. The
City shall use the responses as the basis of its evaluation. The proposals should be as brief and
concise as possible without sacrificing clarity. Proposals containing irrelevant material or an
abundance of excessively vague language may be penalized in t he screening process.
Arrange proposals to match the following outline. Respond to each and every question and/or
statement. In the context of this section “you” and “your” is the same as “Proposer” and
“Proposer’s”, respectively.
Packet Pg. 109
10
Page 14 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Chapter 1: Title Page
The title page shall contain at a minimum the name of the Proposer, RFP Title, and Due Date.
Chapter 2: Table of Contents
The Table of Contents outlines in sequential order the chapters of your proposal.
Chapter 3: Executive Summary – Description of Organization
Provide an executive summary introducing your firm. Limit your response to thre e pages. At a
minimum, include the following information:
o Briefly describe your firm’s organization and history in relation to providing mobile License
Plate Recognition System (LPR) similar to the services described in this RFP.
o Your experience including the number of years in business.
o The location of the office from which this engagement will be serviced and the range of
activities performed at that office.
o Include a brief summary of the factual, core aspects of your proposed services.
o Reaffirm required experience in providing systems and performing services similar to those
outlined in this RFP.
Chapter 4: Project Manager
Identify the Project Manager you propose to assign to the engagement. Provide background on
the experience of the Project Manager. Limit your response to three pages.
Chapter 5: Organizational Experience
Not applicable
Chapter 6: Organizational Chart and Project Team
Provide a list of staff that will be committed to the project, with their professional resumes.
Chapter 7: References
Provide three references from similar projects and clients. Limit your response to three pages.
Chapter 8: Customer Service and Technical Support
Provide a description of the customer service features and technical support abilities of the
Proposer. Include any training and staff development that would b enefit the City. Any additional
features that would be relevant can also be included here.
Chapter 9: Sub Proposers (if any)
Identify any sub-Proposers that would be used. Give a detailed description of their involvement,
scope of work, background, and responsibilities. The price proposed shall include any and all work
to be done by sub-Proposers, and the City will only process claims and payments to the Proposer.
A list of sub-Proposers to be hired shall be submitted as a part of the proposal. Also disclose
whether or not the sub Proposer is a subsidiary or is financially tied to the Proposer in any other
manner. Use of sub-Proposer does not relieve the Proposer of overall responsibility. City reserves
the right to approve all proposed sub-Proposers.
Chapter 10: System Specifications
Submit a detailed description of your Mobile License Plate Recognition System. Limit your
response to ten pages. At a minimum include:
o A narrative overview of your system and its functionality.
Packet Pg. 110
10
Page 15 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
o A listing and brief description of all software included and hardware required.
o The benefits of your system and how it will meet and/or exceed the scope of services.
o Detail the new processes and workflows the City will need to adopt to use your
system.
o Describe any integration you have with other related products as well as the
customization possibilities with your system.
o Features exclusive to your system.
Chapter 11: Implementation
Submit an overview of your approach to implementation. Limit your response to four
pages. At a minimum, include:
o A project schedule including phases, activities, tasks, training, milestones, decision points,
deliverables, etc.
o A description of how your project management will keep the implementation on schedule
and ensure the end result is a satisfactorily functioning system.
o Expected use of City resources including City hardware and assistance from City Staff.
o Information or data to be used or obtained from the City.
Chapter 12: Risks
Identify in detail any anticipated or potential concerns or risks in implementing your system; your
approach to resolving these concerns; and any special assistance required from the City. Limit
your response to two pages.
Chapter 13: Disclosure of Contract Failures and Litigation
Disclose any alleged significant prior or ongoing contract failures, contract breaches, any civil or
criminal litigation or investigation pending which involves your firm or in which your firm has
been judged guilty or liable, or which may affect the performance of the services to be rendered
herein, in which your firm, any of its employees, sub-Proposers, or sub consultants is or has been
involved in within the last three (3) years.
Chapter 14: Proposer’s Financial Stability Assurance
Not applicable
Chapter 15: Fee Proposal
Include detailed pricing information for the mobile License Plate Recognition System as described
in this RFP.
Quote fees as all inclusive, not-to-exceed, fixed fees for each relevant aspect of the Mobile
License Plate Recognition System. The fee could be a one-time fee, fee per use, fee per year, fee
per contract period, etc.
Clearly explain your pricing model. The City will consider alternative pricing models. Also,
identify all other costs beyond the usage cost such as a fee for training, system maintenance, etc.
As noted above, prepare the fee proposal as all inclusive, not-to-exceed, fixed fees:
o All Inclusive – Covers all direct and indirect expenses incurred by the Proposer including but
not limited to; travel, telephone, copying and other out-of-pocket expenses.
o Not-To-Exceed – The actual fees shall not exceed the amount specified in fee proposal.
Packet Pg. 111
10
Page 16 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
o Fixed Fee – All prices, rates, fees and conditions outlined in the proposal shall remain
fixed and valid for the entire length of the contract and any/all renewals.
Provide exact fees - not a range. Take advantage of the opportunity to ask questions and receive
answers to gain clarification. Furthermore, document any significant assumptions for arriving at
fee estimates. You are responsible for verifying the correctness of calculations in your fee
proposal.
Each of the following is a component of the fee proposal. Provide detail in your narrative
responses to ensure clarity.
o Software/Product Licenses
o Project Management
o Travel
o Design/Planning
o Equipment Fees
o Customizations
o Interface Development
o Training
o Deployment (Installation)
o Support and Maintenance
Present the fees of ongoing support and maintenance for your LPR system. If you offer different
levels of support, price the level of support that you recommend the City purchase. Furthermore,
provide detailed fees for all levels of support and maintenance you offer. Support and
maintenance fees should start in Year 1, which is the first 365 days after the system is live and
accepted by the City.
Proposer shall continue to support all the software and licenses they are proposing. The City
requires Proposer to quote Support and Maintenance for a minimum of five (5) years. Proposer
is encouraged to quote Support and Maintenance fees beyond year five, for as many years as
they are willing to include in the contract.
The City reserves the right to make an award without further discussion of the fee proposal
submitted. Therefore, the Proposer should submit the fee proposal on the most favorable terms
they can offer. However, this does not limit the City from negotiating with the selected Proposer.
Fees will be evaluated on both initial and ongoing fees. The financial evaluation will be based on
the total (life cycle) fee of ownership for the system over a period of up to ten (10) years, or
longer if determinable. The fees used will be those provided by Proposer and as established by
the City for hardware/software and system operations.
Configuration Adjustment: The City reserves the right to select and exclude any software for the
acquisition regardless of the configuration proposed. As part of the evaluation process, the City
may find it necessary to add or delete software or services from proposals to make equivalent
comparisons.
A finalization of the specifications and scope of services is expected as a part of final contract
negotiation or through a Best and Final Offer (BAFO) process. By the BAFO the Proposer(s)
remaining in the process will have met with the City and or demonstrated their product giving
them the opportunity to obtain a complete understanding of all requirements.
Packet Pg. 112
10
Page 17 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Chapter 16: Additional Required Forms and/or Attachments
Include the following required forms and/or attachments to your Proposal. Forms are included
in the RFP.
o Form A – Signature Affidavit – A company representative with authority to bind the
Proposer to the City by contract shall sign the form, attesting the proposal has been
submitted in conformance to stated requirements.
o Form B – Vendor Profile – complete the information about your firm.
o Form C – References
o Form D – Statement of Past Contract Disqualifications
o Form E – Cost Proposal Submittal Form
o Form F – Optional Cost Proposal Submittal Form
Packet Pg. 113
10
Page 18 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM A: SIGNATURE AFFIDAVIT
NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR RESPONSE.
In signing proposals, we certify that we have not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any
agreement or participated in any collusion or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free
competition; that no attempt has been made to induce any other person or firm to submit or
not to submit proposals, that proposals have been independently arrived at, without collusion
with any other Proposers, competitor or potential competitor; that proposals have not been
knowingly disclosed prior to the opening of proposals to any other Proposers or competitor;
that the above statement is accurate under penalty of perjury.
The undersigned, submitting this proposal, hereby agrees with all the terms, conditions, and
specifications required by the City in this Request for Proposal, declares that the attached
proposal and pricing are in conformity therewith, and attests to the truthfulness of all
submissions in response to this solicitation.
Proposers shall provide the information requested below. Include the legal name of the
Proposer and signature of the person(s) legally authorized to bind the Proposers to a contract.
SIGNATURE AND DATE OF AUTHORIZE REPRESENTATIVE
PRINT NAME: __________________________________________________
FIRM (PROPOSER) NAME: ________________________________________
Packet Pg. 114
10
Page 19 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM B: VENDOR PROFILE
Company Information
Company Name (Proposer)
FEIN: (If FEIN is not applicable, SSN collected
upon award)
Contact Name Title
Telephone (
)
Fax
(
)
Email
Address City State Zip
Primary Individual Contact Information
Contact Name Title
Telephone
( )
Fax
(
)
Email
Address City State Zip
Packet Pg. 115
10
Page 20 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM C: REFERENCES
Describe fully three contracts performed by your firm that demonstrate your ability to provide
the services included with the scope of the specifications. The City reserves the right to contact
references listed for additional information regarding your firm's qualifications.
Reference No. 1
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Date of Services
Contract Amount
Description of services
Project Outcome
Packet Pg. 116
10
Page 21 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Reference No. 2
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Date of Services
Contract Amount
Description of services
Project Outcome
Packet Pg. 117
10
Page 22 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Reference No. 3
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Date of Services
Contract Amount
Description of services
Project Outcome
Packet Pg. 118
10
Page 23 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM D: STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS
The Proposer shall state whether it or any of its officers or employees who have a proprietary
interest in it, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or
completing a federal, state, or local government project because of the violation of law, a safety
regulation, or for any other reason, including but not limited to financial difficulties, project
delays, or disputes regarding work or product quality, and if so to explain the circumstances.
Do you have any disqualification as described in the above paragraph to declare?
Yes No
If yes, explain the circumstances.
Executed on at _______________________________________ under
penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct.
___________________________________________
Signature of Authorized Representative of Proposer
___________________________________________
Print name of Authorized Representative of Proposer
Packet Pg. 119
10
Page 24 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM E: COST PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORM
The City is requesting proposals for a mobile License Plate Recognition System (LPR). Each
Proposer shall fill out the following cost proposal. If there are any additional costs not included
in this Cost Proposal, those costs must be identified on a separate sheet of paper and included
as stated in this Request for Proposal. On a separate page, a detailed breakdown of th e costs
below as well as a detailed price list shall also be provided.
Provide cost proposal associated with the purchase of one (1) LPR unit and required backend
software, hardware and other components necessary to operate the LPR system. Provide the
additional costs related to addition of a second or third LPR system.
DESCRIPTION COST
1a) SINGLE Portable License Plate Recognition
System in accordance with all the specifications
outlined.
$
1b) each ADDITIONAL Portable License Plate
Recognition System in accordance with all the
specifications outlined.
$
2a) SINGLE Fixed License Plate Recognition
System in accordance with all the specifications
outlined.
$
2b) each ADDITIONAL Fixed License Plate
Recognition System in accordance with all the
specifications outlined.
$
Make sure pricing includes all technical support, training, delivery, installation and
warranty.
As noted above, prepare the fee proposal as all inclusive, not -to-exceed, fixed fees:
• All inclusive – Covers all direct and indirect necessary expenses included but not
limited to: travel, telephone, copying, and other out-of-pocket expenses
• Not-to-exceed – The actual fees shall not exceed the amount specified in Fee
Proposal
• Fixed Fee – All prices, rates, fees, and conditions outlined in the proposal shall
remain fixed and valid for the entire length of the contract and any/all renewals.
Packet Pg. 120
10
Page 25 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
FORM F: OPTIONAL COST PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORM
As part of the Mobile License Plate Recognition System (LPR), some spare or additional
equipment or services may be added by the City. By inclusion of Form F, City is not required to
purchase, lease or otherwise acquire any hardware, software, training, or other services
specified in this section.
Complete table with per unit costs/fees that the Proposer offers and feels the City may be
interested in considering:
Description of Equipment or Service Unit $ per
Annual software/hardware warranty Year $
Packet Pg. 121
10
Page 26 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Appendix A: FORM OF AGREEMENT (SAMPLE)
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on [date],
by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred
to as City, and [CONTRACTOR’S NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS], hereinafter referred to as
Contractor.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on [date], City requested proposals for a Mobile License Plate Recognition
System (LPR) per Specification No. 91547.
WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal which was accepted
by City for said [supplies, equipment, services, project, whatever].
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and
entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said [supplies, equipment, services,
project, whatever].
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 91547 and Contractor's
proposal dated [date], are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing [supplies, equipment, services, project,
whatever] as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor compensation
in a total sum not to exceed [$ .00].
4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do
everything required by this Agreement and the said specification.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification, or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Council [or other official]
of the City.
Packet Pg. 122
10
Page 27 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties
hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduce d to writing and specifically
incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,
postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contractor [ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant
that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed
the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
____________________________________ By:____________________________________
City Clerk City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR
_____________________________________ By: ___________________________________
City Attorney
Packet Pg. 123
10
Page 28 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Appendix B: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The Proposer shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims
for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder by the Proposer, its agents, representatives, employees or
sub Proposers.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 20
10 Prior to 1993 or CG 20 10 07 04 with CG 20 37 10 01 or the exact equivalent as
determined by the City).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability,
code 1 (any auto).
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's
Liability Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate
limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this
project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence
limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be
declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce
or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of
losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain,
or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as
insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the
Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned,
occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by
the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of
protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be
primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and
volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
Packet Pg. 124
10
Page 29 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall
not contribute with it.
3. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is
made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits
except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the City. The Consultant agrees to notify the City in the
event that the policy is suspended, voided or reduced in coverage or limits. A minimum of
30 days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, will be provided.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating
of no less than A:VII.
Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing
maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general
liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The
endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.
Sub-consultants. Consultant shall include all sub-consultants as insured under its policies
or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each sub-consultant. All
coverages for sub-consultants shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
Packet Pg. 125
10
Page 30 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
Appendix C: FUNCTIONAL AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
It is the intent of the City to have incorporated, included or provided the following functional and
technical requirements in the Proposer’s solution provided herein. The City reserves the right to
remove, add or prioritize any and/or all requirements contained herein without prior notice to
Proposers.
Mandatory Specifications
1. Equipment must be mountable to a car or truck without increasing the width or height of
the vehicle by more than twelve inches.
2. Equipment must function without failure in wind, rain, snow, and temperatures above
100 deg. F.
3. Equipment must have a display on the interior of the vehicle that shows vehicle plate
numbers as they are scanned. This display must be clearly visible to the operator(s) from
both front seats of the vehicle.
4. Equipment must be able to read license plates on both sides of the vehicle simultaneously
at speeds up to 25 mph with an accuracy of at least 90 percent .
5. The City prefers bidders to offer both a theft-resistant permanent installation option, and
a portable option. The time required to dismount and remount the portable version shall
be 30 or fewer minutes.
6. All wiring and components must be installed to meet the vehicle’s original manufacturer’s
specifications and not void any vehicle warranties.
7. When used in off-street facilities, the inventory upload into the Parking Services PARCS
servers shall be automated and require 30 or fewer minutes to complete.
8. If the Mobile LPR system uses software that is route-specific, meaning that the inventory
takers must follow a pre-determined route when circulating through the facilities or
streets to obtain the inventories, such software shall be GUI-modifiable by the user to
alter pre-determined routes to reflect changes in parking configurations.
9. The system shall have multiple cameras in order to capture license plate data from
vehicles parked on either side of a bi-directional or uni-directional drive aisle. Multiple
passes down a single drive aisle is not acceptable.
10. Bidder must provide training and support for the LPR system and database download
component for one year. The training will consist of at least 2 classroom trainings and
support 24 hours per day 7 days per week for an entire year.
11. The LPR system must be able to read license plates at all angles to the LPR vehicle
between perpendicular and parallel.
12. The LPR system must be able to read license plates as close as five feet from the camera
or as far as fifteen feet from the camera.
13. The LPR system must have the ability to store 10,000 vehicle images.
Packet Pg. 126
10
Page 31 LPR RFP – specification no. 91547
14. The LPR system software must have the ability to count and report the number of vehicles
in any given lot or garage.
15. The LPR system software must collect spatial coordinates, time and date of reading, and
a photograph of each vehicle surveyed. All records must be exportable in a format
compatible with ESRI ArcGIS and MS Excel.
16. The LPR system must give a visual and audible warning when it finds a vehicle that is in
violation of time restrictions or permit requirements.
17. All mounting hardware for the LPR system must be provided by the vendor.
18. The LPR system must have electronic tire-chalking capability.
19. Bidder must provide a detailed list of parts, including line/item un it pricing on an FOB
Destination basis.
20. The LPR system shall alert the driver of a possible miss-read and allow the driver to correct
the data at the time of taking inventory. The LPR system shall also allow corrections to be
made once the inventory has been uploaded to the server.
21. The LPR system must perform with 90 percent accuracy in all indoor or outdoor lighting
conditions regardless of the time of day or night. The Vendor shall provide any necessary
shading or lighting elements required to mitigate th e effect of the ambient lighting
conditions on the LPR system performance.
22. All items bid are to be new product (not used, remanufactured, refurbished, rebuilt, etc.)
23. At a minimum, the Standard Manufacturer’s Warranty against defects and workmanship
is required. Include information about your specific warranty, including your policy on
replacement and repairs.
24. The LPR system shall be designed to operate in North America, where plate styles, fonts,
size and spacing cannot be predetermined. All plates issued b y states within the US and
plates issued by Canadian authorities as well as Mexican authorities shall be readable,
including license plates that are stamped metal as well as plates that are flat (painted
only).
Packet Pg. 127
10
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 128
10
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Miguel Guardado, Network Services Supervisor
SUBJECT: ENTERPRISE STORAGE UPGRADE
RECOMMENDATION
1. Award a contract and authorize a purchase order for Connection (formally GovConnection)
in the amount of $299,972 for the upgrade and installation of the City’s Enterprise Storage
System (the Compellent storage solution) and three years of 24/7 support; and
2. Waive formal bids and authorize use of Dell WSCA/NASPO Contract#: MNWNC-108 to
procure this purchase from Connection (formally GovConnection) as allowed under 3.24.060
E. of the City of San Luis Obispo Muncipal Code.
DISCUSSION
Background
In October 2010, Information Technology issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a centralized
data storage system to support the new EnerGov, Laserfiche, Cityworks and Utility billing systems.
Staff awarded a contract to GovConnection to supply a Compellent data storage system. In 2012,
the storage system was migrated to support the Police Department’s growing needs and new
controllers and shelves were purchased for the City’s operations through GovConnection.
Additional storage shelves are purchased as necessary to support the growing needs of all City
Departments.
The Compellent storage solution consists of primary data storage equipment located at City Hall
and Police Headquarters; mirrored secondary storage systems are located at the Emergency
Dispatch Center. Data is continually updated to the mirrored storage system for disaster recovery.
The City achieved this design through the RFP process in 2010.
Current Storage Status
This Council Agenda report is requesting authorization to purchase new controllers and drive
shelves to replace the current end-of-life (EOL) equipment. EOL means that the migrated
controllers and shelves for the Police Department are EOL in January of 2018. Some storage
shelves for all other Departments are EOL in January of 2018, while the controllers are EOL in
January 2019.
IT requests to purchase new storage controllers and shelves to replace the EOL equipment to
continue to support the needs of all City Departments. We have requested through Connection to
upgrade all EOL controllers and shelves in a single purchase utilizing Dell WSCA/NASPO
Contract#: MNWNC-108.
Packet Pg. 129
11
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The requested actions are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for this project is available from combining two Council approved Capital Improvement
Projects: the VMware Infrastructure and Storage Capacity Replacement projects that are interrelated
and support this initiative.
ALTERNATIVES
An alternative is to continue using the existing enterprise storage system that has become End-
of-Life and risk that the vendor will no longer support the critical City hardware. This would
place the City in a difficult position should a hardware problem arise and staff must wait days for
parts or a very expensive resolution. City departments depend on the data, applications and the
many systems stored in this Enterprise Storage System.
Staff researched the possibility of utilizing cloud based storage rather than in -house physical
storage equipment. Cloud based storage costs proved to be considerably more expensive due to
the on-going access fees required for the compute and delivery of data from the Cloud
environment. In addition, the equipment requested in this report will seamlessly integrate with
the City’s newer Dell Compellent storage system. Only part of the current Compellent system is
due for replacement.
These alternatives are not recommended for stated reasons.
Packet Pg. 130
11
Attachments:
a - GCI Quote#24361847_04-W1
b - NASPO State of California's Participating Addendum
c - Form of Agreement - Connection
d - General Terms and Conditions
e - Quote_PCC05503A SC4020i replace S40 17987_17988
f - Quote_PCC05504A SLO SC4020i replace S40 17986 (ECC)
g - Quote_PCC05505B SLO SC4020i replace S40 8325 (Fire 1)
h - Quote_PCC05506B SLO SC4020i to replace S40 8326_8327 (City Hall)
Packet Pg. 131
11
ORDERING INFORMATION
GovConnection, Inc. DBA Connection
Dell WSCA/NASPO Contract #: MNWNC-108
State of California Participation Addendum
Contract Expiration: 1 October 2020
Please contact your account manager with questions.
Ordering Address
GovConnection, Inc.
732 Milford Road
Merrimack, NH 03054
Remittance Address
GovConnection, Inc.
PO Box 536477
Pittsburgh, PA 15253-5906
Please reference the Contract # on all purchase orders.
TERMS & CONDITIONS
Payment Terms: NET 30 (subject to approved credit)
FOB Point: DESTINATION (within Continental US)
Maximum Order Limitation: NONE
FEIN: 52-1837891
DUNS Number: 80-967-8782
CEC: 80-068888K
Cage Code: OGTJ3
Business Size: LARGE
WARRANTY: Manufacturer’s Standard Commercial Warranty
Important Notice: --- THIS QUOTATION IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING Terms of Sale: All purchases from GovConnection, Inc. are
subject to the Terms and Conditions of our Dell WSCA/NASPO Contract #MNWNC-108 - State of California Participation Addendum
Contract. Any Order accepted by GovConnection for the items included in this Quotation is expressly limited to those Terms and
Conditions; any other terms and conditions referenced or appearing in your Purchase Order are considered null and void. No other
terms and conditions shall apply without the written consent of GovConnection, Inc. Please refer to our Quote Number in your order.
If you require a hard copy invoice for your credit card order, please visit the link below and click on the
Proof of Purchase/Invoice link on the left side of the page to print one:
https://www.govconnection.com/web/Shopping/ProofOfPurchase.htm
Please forward your Contract to: SLEDOPS@connection.com
QUESTIONS: Call 800-800-0019
FAX: 603.683.0374
Packet Pg. 132
11
Account Executive:Shaun McFadden
Phone:(800) 800-0019 ext. 33178
Fax:(603) 683-0732
Email:shaun.mcfadden@connection.com Date:6/23/2017
Valid Through:7/22/2017
Account Manager:Account #:2072289
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Customer Contact:Eric Mortensen Phone:(805) 781-7529
Email:emortensen@slocity.org Fax:(805) 431-5000
DELIVERY FOB SHIP VIA SHIP WEIGHT TERMS CONTRACT ID#
Destination UPS Ground Commercial .00 lbs NET 30 MNWNC-108
*Line #Qty Item #Mfg. Part #Description Mfg.Price Ext
1 1 Dell / Compellent System 8325 Upgrade 75,399.00$ 75,399.00$
2 1 Dell / Compellent System 17987 / 17988
Upgrade 63,799.00$ 63,799.00$
3 1 Dell / Compellent System 17986 Upgrade 63,799.00$ 63,799.00$
4 1 Dell / Compellent System 8326 / 8327
Upgrade 75,399.00$ 75,399.00$
Subtotal 278,396.00$
Fee 0.00$
Shipping and
Handling 0.00$
Tax 21,575.68$
Total 299,971.68$
5-30 Days A/R/O
Important Notice: --- THIS QUOTATION IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING Terms of Sale: All purchases from GovConnection, Inc. are subject to the Terms and Conditions of our Dell
WSCA/NASPO Contract #MNWNC-108 - State of California Participation Addendum Contract. Any Order accepted by GovConnection for the items included in this Quotation is expressly limited
to those Terms and Conditions; any other terms and conditions referenced or appearing in your Purchase Order are considered null and void. No other terms and conditions shall apply without
the written consent of GovConnection, Inc. Please refer to our Quote Number in your order.
(805) 781-7135 (805) 781-7529
SALES QUOTE
GovConnection, Inc.# 24361847.04-W1
732 Milford Road PLEASE REFER TO THE ABOVE
QUOTE # WHEN ORDERINGMerrimack, NH 03054
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
990 PALM STREET
QUOTE PROVIDED TO:SHIP TO:
AB#: 2072289 AB#: 14175647
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
JASON TAKAGI ERIC MORTENSEN
990 PALM ST
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
Page 2 of 2 6/23/2017Packet Pg. 133
11
Packet Pg. 134
11
Packet Pg. 135
11
Packet Pg. 136
11
Packet Pg. 137
11
Packet Pg. 138
11
Packet Pg. 139
11
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this
_____________day of ____________________________________, by and between the CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and GovConnection, INC, DBA
Connection. hereinafter referred to as Contractor.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on the City wants to upgrade the existing Enterprise Storage System and Support
Services; and
WHEREAS, Contractor is qualified to perform this type of service and has submitted a proposal to
do so which has been accepted by the City.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and
entered, as first written above, until contract expiration.
2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this agreement, City
will pay, and Contractor shall receive, compensation in a total sum not to exceed $299,971.68.
4. CONTRACTOR’S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City provide
all specified services as described GCI Quote#24361847_04-W1 attached hereto and incorporated into this
Agreement by reference. Contractor further agrees to the contract and performance terms as set forth in
Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by reference.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer.
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties
hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically
incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,
postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
Packet Pg. 140
11
Page 2
City City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Consultant GovConnection, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Shaun McFadden
732 Milford Road
Merrimack, NH 03054
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant
that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO:
________________________________ By: _____________________________________
, City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR:
________________________________ By: _____________________________________
City Attorney GovConnection, Inc.
Packet Pg. 141
11
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
1
1. Business Tax. The Contrator must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax certificate
before execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business tax program
may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134.
2. Ability to Perform. The Contrator warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through
subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry out
and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, count y, city, and
special district laws, ordinances, and regulations.
3. Laws to be Observed. The Contrator shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and
comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San Luis Obispo
ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work.
4. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that the
Contrator is required to pay.
5. Permits and Licenses. The Contrator shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and
fees, and give all notices necessary.
6. Safety Provisions. The Contrator shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety
established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.
7. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contrator's operations create a condition hazardous
to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect
and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take
such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the
public and employees.
8. Preservation of City Property. The Contrator shall provide and install suitable safeguards,
approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or
damaged resulting from the Contrator's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Contrator's
expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contrator
began work.
9. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contrator warrants on behalf of itself and all sub-Contrators
engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States
pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall be
employed in the performance of the work hereunder.
10. Contrator Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contrator agrees that it will
not engage in, nor permit such sub- Contrators as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in
employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual
orientation, or religion of such persons.
11. Work Delays. Should the Contrator be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done
hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire,
earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or labor due
to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then the time of
completion may, at the City's sole option, be extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by
the City and the Contrator.
Packet Pg. 142
11
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
2
12. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and
acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services provided by the Contrator
(Net 30).
13. Inspection. The Contrator shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to
ascertain that the services of the Contrator are being performed in accordance with the
requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any,
shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of su ch work shall not relieve
Contrator of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements.
14. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written
materials used by Contrator in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any
payment to Contrator.
15. Interests of Contrator. The Contrator covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not
acquire any interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any manner or degree
with the performance of the work hereunder. The Contrator further covenants that, in the
performance of this work, no sub-Contrator or person having such an interest shall be employed.
The Contrator certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in performing this
work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of
the work hereunder, the Contrator shall at all times be deemed an independent Contrator and not an
agent or employee of the City.
16. Indemnification for Professional Liability. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contrator
shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City and any and all of its officials,
employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities,
damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and cost which arise out of, pertain to, or
relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contrator.
17. Contract Assignment. The Contrator shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the
contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or
business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City.
18. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contrator is not
faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contrator in
writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the Contrator a 10 (ten) calendar
day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency.
If the Contrator has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in
the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may terminate the contract
immediately by written notice to the Contrator to said effect. Thereafter, neither party shall have
any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights under the contract except, however, any
and all obligations of the Contrator's surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be
extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived by the termination thereof.
In said event, the Contrator shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from
the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice of
Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from such
breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone
or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the Contrator as may be set forth in the Proposal;
compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Contrator shall
Packet Pg. 143
11
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
3
be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the
overall workscope.
The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed abandonment
of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and
complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the Contrator be entitled to receive in
excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal.
19. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by
or in possession of the Contrator as part of the work or services under these specifications shall
become the permanent property of the City, and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.
20. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to,
prepared by or assembled by the Contrator as part of the work or services under these
specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to any individual or
organization by the Contrator without the prior written approval of the City.
21. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings,
specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contrator is required to furnish in
limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contrator shall
provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contrator for the
costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contrator's direct expense.
22. Required Deliverable Products. The Contrator will be required to provide:
2 hard copies of the draft or electronic copy (Adobe Acrobat format)
2 hard copies of the final project report, and 1 electronic copy (Acrobat Adobe format) of the final
report.
City staff will review any documents or materials provided by the Contrator and, where necessary,
the Contrator will be required to respond to staff comments and make such changes as deemed
appropriate.
Computer files must be on 3½", high-density, write-protected diskettes or CD’s formatted for use
on IBM-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the
directory. Alternatively, files may be emailed to the City.
23. Amendments. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall
be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Engineer of the City.
24. Complete Agreement. These Purchase Order Conditions and Contrators proposal shall constitute
the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding or
representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or
effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or representation be binding upon the
parties hereto.
Packet Pg. 144
11
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
4
25. Insurance Requirements. The Contrator shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages
and amounts specified in these conditions as a precondition to contract execution. The Contrator
shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to
persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the
work hereunder by the Contrator, its agents, representatives, employees or sub-Contrators.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 20 10
Prior to 1993 or CG 20 10 07 04 with CG 20 37 10 01 or the exact equivalent as determined by the
City).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1
(any auto).
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability
Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the Contrator's profession.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contrator shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property
damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general
aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to
and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers;
or the Contrator shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be
endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as
respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contrator; products and
completed operations of the Contrator; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contrator; or
automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contrator. The coverage shall contain no
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees,
agents or volunteers.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Contrator's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance
as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-
insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be
excess of the Contrator's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3. The Contrator's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit
is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
Packet Pg. 145
11
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
5
4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty
(30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no
less than A:VII.
Verification of Coverage. Contrator shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing
maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and
automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences.
Packet Pg. 146
11
PC Connection, Inc.Quote Date:6/16/2017
730 Milford Rd.Quotation #:PCC05503A
Merrimack, NH 03054 Valid Until:7/16/2017
Phone: 888-213-0607 Prepared By:PC CONNECTION PC
CONNECTION
SFDC Deal Id:13594829
Type:System 17987/17988
Bill To:
City of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone: 805-781-5051
Model Number Dell SKU
CT-SC4020-BASE-ISCSI
DS-SAS-25-3840SSDRI-M-Y
DS-SAS6-35-4000X7K-D
EN-BLNK-SAS6-25-Y
EN-SC200-1235
PA-CBL-SAS-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-Y
PA-RK-RR2-D
SW-APM-Y
SW-CORE-BASE48
SW-PERF-BASE48
SW-RDP-BASE48
PS-PDADDRP
PS-SC2XX2U-PD
PS-SC4XXX-PD
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS
$63,799.00
Power (Watts):950 $4,944.43
Heat (BTUs):3,243.00 $68,743.43
Rack Units:4
Weight (Lbs):106
SSD (Raw TB):26.88
SAS (Raw TB):48
Total (Raw TB):74.88
Description Quantity
Hardware & Drives
Quotation to City of San
Luis Obispo
Review customer quote
SC4020 10Gb iSCSI - 4ports (Single drives)1
Dell 3.84TB, SAS 12Gb, SSD, RI, 2.5 7
4TB, SAS, 6Gb, 7K HDD 12
Enclosure Blank, SAS, Drive Bay Blanks, 2.5"17
Compellent SC200 Enclosure, 3.5" 12-Bay 1
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 2M, Qty 2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power Cord, Qty2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power cord, Qty2 1
Ready Rails II Static Rails for 4-post Racks 1
Software
SW, Application Protection Manager Suite License 1
SW, Storage Center OS Core Base License 1
SW, Storage Optimization Bundle Base License 1
SW, Remote Data Protection Bundle Base License 1
Professional Services
ProDeploy Add-On: Replication Services for Dell Storage
(Requires ProDeploy)1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Disk Series 200/220 2U Exp
Enclosure 1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Series 4XXX SAN 1
Support (CML-HWMTC)
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Dell/Compellent
Series SC4020 1
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Enclosure, SC200, 3.5"
12-bay 1
Support Center (CML-SWMTC)
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Application
Protection Manager Suite (includes Replay Manager)1
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Storage Center
OS Core 1
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Remote Data
Protection Bundle
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW,Storage
Optimization Bundle
Subtotal
Sales Tax @ 7.75%
1
1
24x7 Support Center w/ Priority On-Site (4 hour)
*Grand Total
Totals
***Support Term: 3 year (36 months)
Packet Pg. 147
11
PC Connection, Inc.Quote Date:6/16/2017
730 Milford Rd.Quotation #:PCC05504A
Merrimack, NH 03054 Valid Until:7/16/2017
Phone: 888-213-0607 Prepared By:PC CONNECTION PC
CONNECTION
SFDC Deal Id:13594829
Type:System 17986
Bill To:
City of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone: 805-781-5051
Model Number Dell SKU
CT-SC4020-BASE-ISCSI
DS-SAS-25-3840SSDRI-M-Y
DS-SAS6-35-4000X7K-D
EN-BLNK-SAS6-25-Y
EN-SC200-1235
PA-CBL-SAS-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-Y
PA-RK-RR2-D
SW-APM-Y
SW-CORE-BASE48
SW-PERF-BASE48
SW-RDP-BASE48
PS-PDADDRP
PS-SC2XX2U-PD
PS-SC4XXX-PD
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS
$63,799.00
Power (Watts):950 $4,944.43
Heat (BTUs):3,243.00 $68,743.43
Rack Units:4
Weight (Lbs):106
SSD (Raw TB):26.88
SAS (Raw TB):48
Total (Raw TB):74.88
****The pricing is displayed in
the US Dollar currency
Hardware & Drives
Quotation to City of San Luis
Obispo
Description Quantity
SC4020 10Gb iSCSI - 4ports (Single drives)1
Dell 3.84TB, SAS 12Gb, SSD, RI, 2.5 7
4TB, SAS, 6Gb, 7K HDD 12
Enclosure Blank, SAS, Drive Bay Blanks, 2.5"17
Compellent SC200 Enclosure, 3.5" 12-Bay 1
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 2M, Qty 2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power Cord, Qty2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power cord, Qty2 1
Ready Rails II Static Rails for 4-post Racks 1
Software
SW, Application Protection Manager Suite License 1
SW, Storage Center OS Core Base License 1
SW, Storage Optimization Bundle Base License 1
SW, Remote Data Protection Bundle Base License 1
Professional Services
ProDeploy Add-On: Replication Services for Dell Storage
(Requires ProDeploy)1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Disk Series 200/220 2U Exp
Enclosure 1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Series 4XXX SAN 1
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Dell/Compellent
Series SC4020 1
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Enclosure, SC200,
3.5" 12-bay 1
Subtotal
Sales Tax @ 7.75%
***Support Term: 3 year (36 months)
Totals
*Grand Total
24x7 Support Center w/ Priority On-Site (4 hour)
Review customer quote
Support Center (CML-SWMTC)
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Application
Protection Manager Suite (includes Replay Manager)1
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Storage
Center OS Core 1
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW,Storage
Optimization Bundle 1
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Remote Data
Protection Bundle 1
Support (CML-HWMTC)
Next
Packet Pg. 148
11
PC Connection, Inc.Quote Date:6/16/2017730 Milford Rd.Quotation #:PCC05505BMerrimack, NH 03054 Valid Until:7/16/2017Phone: 888-213-0607 Prepared By:PC CONNECTION PC CONNECTIONSFDC Deal Id:13594829Type:System 8325
Bill To:
City of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone: 805-781-5051
Model Number Dell SKU
CT-SC4020-BASE-ISCSI
DS-SAS-25-3840SSDRI-M-Y
DS-SAS6-35-4000X7K-D
EN-BLNK-SAS6-25-Y
EN-SC200-1235
PA-CBL-SAS-.6M-D
PA-CBL-SAS-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-Y
PA-RK-RR2-D
SW-APM-Y
SW-CORE-BASE48
SW-PERF-BASE48
SW-RDP-BASE48
PS-PDADDRP
PS-SC2XX2U-PD
PS-SC4XXX-PD
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS
$75,399.00 Power (Watts):1,400.00 $5,843.43 Heat (BTUs):4,779.00 $81,242.43 Rack Units:6
Weight (Lbs):181
SSD (Raw TB):26.88
SAS (Raw TB):96Total (Raw TB):122.88
****The pricing is displayed in the US Dollar currency
Hardware & Drives
Quotation to City of San Luis Obispo
Description QuantityReview customer quote
SC4020 10Gb iSCSI - 4ports (Single drives)1
Dell 3.84TB, SAS 12Gb, SSD, RI, 2.5 7
4TB, SAS, 6Gb, 7K HDD 24
Enclosure Blank, SAS, Drive Bay Blanks, 2.5"17
Compellent SC200 Enclosure, 3.5" 12-Bay 2
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 0.6M, Qty 2 1
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 2M, Qty 2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power Cord, Qty2 2
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power cord, Qty2 1
Ready Rails II Static Rails for 4-post Racks 2
Software
SW, Application Protection Manager Suite License 1
SW, Storage Center OS Core Base License 1
SW, Storage Optimization Bundle Base License 1
SW, Remote Data Protection Bundle Base License 1
Professional Services
ProDeploy Add-On: Replication Services for Dell Storage (Requires ProDeploy)1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Disk Series 200/220 2U Exp Enclosure 2
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Series 4XXX SAN 1
Support (CML-HWMTC)
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Dell/Compellent Series SC4020 1
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Enclosure, SC200, 3.5" 12-bay 2
Support Center (CML-SWMTC)
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Application Protection Manager Suite (includes Replay Manager)1
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Storage Center OS Core 1
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW,Storage Optimization Bundle 1
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Remote Data Protection Bundle 1
*Grand Total
Totals SubtotalSales Tax @ 7.75%
***Support Term: 3 year (36 months)
24x7 Support Center w/ Priority On-Site (4 hour)
Packet Pg. 149
11
PC Connection, Inc.Quote Date:6/16/2017
730 Milford Rd.Quotation #:PCC05506B
Merrimack, NH 03054 Valid Until:7/16/2017
Phone: 888-213-0607 Prepared By:PC CONNECTION PC
CONNECTION
SFDC Deal Id:13594829
Type:System 8326 / 8327
Bill To:
City of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone: 805-781-5051
Model Number Dell SKU
CT-SC4020-BASE-ISCSI
DS-SAS-25-3840SSDRI-M-Y
DS-SAS6-35-4000X7K-D
EN-BLNK-SAS6-25-Y
EN-SC200-1235
PA-CBL-SAS-.6M-D
PA-CBL-SAS-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-D
PA-PC-2M-Y
PA-RK-RR2-D
SW-APM-Y
SW-CORE-BASE48
SW-PERF-BASE48
SW-RDP-BASE48
PS-PDADDRP
PS-SC2XX2U-PD
PS-SC4XXX-PD
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS
$75,399.00
Power (Watts):1,400.00 $5,843.43
Heat (BTUs):4,779.00 $81,242.43
Rack Units:6
Weight (Lbs):181
SSD (Raw TB):26.88
SAS (Raw TB):96
Total (Raw TB):122.88
Hardware & Drives
Quotation to City of San
Luis Obispo
Description Quantity
Review customer quote
SC4020 10Gb iSCSI - 4ports (Single drives)1
Dell 3.84TB, SAS 12Gb, SSD, RI, 2.5 7
4TB, SAS, 6Gb, 7K HDD 24
Enclosure Blank, SAS, Drive Bay Blanks, 2.5"17
Compellent SC200 Enclosure, 3.5" 12-Bay 2
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 0.6M, Qty 2 1
6Gb Mini-SAS to Mini-SAS Cable, 2M, Qty 2 1
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power Cord, Qty2 2
C13-C14, PDU, 12AMP, 6.5 FT (2m), Power cord, Qty2 1
Ready Rails II Static Rails for 4-post Racks 2
Software
SW, Application Protection Manager Suite License 1
SW, Storage Center OS Core Base License 1
SW, Storage Optimization Bundle Base License 1
SW, Remote Data Protection Bundle Base License 1
Professional Services
ProDeploy Add-On: Replication Services for Dell Storage
(Requires ProDeploy)1
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Disk Series 200/220 2U Exp
Enclosure 2
ProDeploy Dell Storage SC Series 4XXX SAN 1
Support (CML-HWMTC)
CT-SC4020-BASE-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Dell/Compellent
Series SC4020 1
EN-SC200-1235-MTCH : Support, 24x7, Enclosure, SC200, 3.5"
12-bay 2
Support Center (CML-SWMTC)
SW-APM-BASE-Y-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Application
Protection Manager Suite (includes Replay Manager)1
SW-CORE-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Storage Center
OS Core 1
SW-PERF-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW,Storage
Optimization Bundle 1
SW-RDP-BASE48-MTCS : Support, 24x7, SW, Remote Data
Protection Bundle 1
*Grand Total
Totals Subtotal
Sales Tax @ 7.75%
***Support Term: 3 year (36 months)
24x7 Support Center w/ Priority On-Site (4 hour)
Packet Pg. 150
11
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Jennifer Metz, Utilities Project Manager
SUBJECT: MARGARITA LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT, SPECIFICATION NO.
91214A
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve plans and specifications for the Margarita Lift Station Replacement, Specification
No. 91214A and authorize staff to advertise for bids; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the
Engineer's estimate of $903,000.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Margarita Lift Station, and its associated 230 feet of six-inch cast iron force main, serves
properties east of South Higuera Street adjacent to Margarita Avenue and was put into service in
1971. At 46 years old, it is operating beyond its useful life. Due to the age and condition of the
lift station, budget for the design of a replacement station was identified in the 2013-15 Financial
Plan, Capital Improvement Plan. The City Council authorized a request for proposals and the
City Manager awarded a contract for design services to replace the lift station in November 2013
and March 2014 respectively. Construction funding for the project was identified in the 2015 -17
Financial Plan, Capital Improvement Plan.
On August 16, 2016, the City Council approved the advertisement of the Margarita Lift Station
Replacement project with a total project budget of $1,102,000 including construction,
construction management, and construction contingencies. Seven general contractors attended a
mandatory pre-bid conference on September 14, 2016. On September 30, 2016, the City received
two bids, both exceeding the engineer’s estimate. On October 26, 2017, the City Manager rejected
all bids. In the 2017-19 Financial Plan, additional funding was added to support the construction
of the project.
The existing Margarita Lift Station is located along the Margarita Avenue street frontage
adjacent to the Margarita Apartments which are owned and managed by the San Luis Obispo
Housing Authority (HASLO). The new Margarita Lift Station will be located on an easement
obtained by the City from HASLO. The City and HASLO collaborated on the project’s fencing,
lighting, sound attenuation, service access, and the connection of recycled water for irrigation on
the property. The old station will be abandoned and the property upon which it was located will
become part of the Margarita Apartments landscaping.
The City acquired temporary construction easements from HASLO for the original construction
schedule of the project with a termination date of December 31, 2017. The City is working with
HASLO to extend the temporary easements to respond to the updated construction schedule.
Packet Pg. 151
12
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction of existing structures and
facilities).
CONCURRENCES
The Public Works Department reviewed the revised plans and special provisions for the
Margarita Lift Station Replacement, Specification No. 91214A and provided comments that have
been incorporated; Community Development concurs with the environmental review findings.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adequate funding is available in the Sewer Fund to support the project’s construction, including
a 20 percent contingency. The project budget is provided below.
Construction Estimate $903,000
Construction Contingencies $180,000
Construction Management $125,000
Materials Testing $5,000
Printing and Miscellaneous $1,000
Project Budget $1,214,000
ALTERNATIVES
Deny or defer approval to advertise. The City Council may choose to deny or defer the approval
to advertise this project. If Council elects to defer the project, Utilities would continue to work to
maintain the station in operable condition. Efforts already made to prolong the life of the station
include repairs to the floor of the sump pump due to leaks in 1995; cathodic protection to extend
the life of the structure in 1996; additional leaks were repaired on the floor and walls in 2010. If
the station is run to failure requiring emergency replacement, emergency construction costs and
impacts to the adjacent housing and the environment would be significant.
Attachments:
a - Council Reading File - Special Provisions for Specification 91214A
b - Council Reading File - Planset for Specification 91214A
Packet Pg. 152
12
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Lee Johnson, Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: 2017-19 DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION
Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a two-year agreement with the San Luis Obispo
Downtown Association (SLODA) for use of funds collected through the Downtown Parking and
Business Improvement Area assessment with no changes other than the term of the agreement
and a new provision requiring SLODA to obtain an encroachment permit for Farmer’s Market.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 1975, the City joined with the Downtown merchants and property owners to create an
assessment district to provide funding for special benefits to the Downtown. This district was
created pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1965 (California Streets
and Highway Code (§36000-36081) by adoption of Ordinance Number 649 (1975 Series). The
law provided the City Council with the sole discretion as to how the revenue derived from the
assessment is to be used within the scope of the purposes spelled out in the 1965 State law.
The boundaries of the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area (DPBIA) were
defined by the Ordinance encompassing the heart of the Downtown business district bounded
generally by Santa Rosa and Beach Streets, and by Palm and Marsh Streets as more specifically
shown on the boundary map (Attachment A).
The Downtown Association (DA), originally created as an advisory body to the City Council,
now operates as an independent 501(c)(6) not-for-profit corporation (SLODA) and has an annual
budget of approximately $600,000, about a third of which is derived from the Area assessment
on the approximately 600 SLODA members. The City of San Luis Obispo now contracts with
the DA for the use of DPBIA assessment funds, as described below.
Prior Agreements
On July 1, 2008, the City Council entered a one-year agreement with the newly formed not-for-
profit SLODA for the provision of services in return for distribution of all DPBIA assessment
revenues. To facilitate a smooth transition from advisory body status to contractor status, the
City and the DA formed a transition team that examined the services provided by the City to the
DA, and services provided by the DA for the benefit of the City. This analysis informed
preparation of the initial contract that enumerated provision of specific services primarily
including three events: Holiday Activities, Concerts in the Plaza and Thursday Night Promotions
(also commonly referred to as Farmers’ Market). The Agreement also listed on-going services
that the DA had traditionally provided, including but not limited to working closely with City
staff to address issues of parking, construction, downtown maintenance, economic vitality and
Packet Pg. 153
13
long term strategies for the viability and health of the SLODA.
In the years since 2008, two-year contracts have been utilized in recognition of the commitment
to the Downtown by both the City and the SLODA. In both 2009-11 and 2011-13 Financial Plan
periods, two year contracts were approved by Council with only minor adjustments to the terms
in recognition of the outstanding work of the SLODA. In May of 2013, the Council approved a
new contract for 2013-15 which had a series of minor changes and several improvements. The
2015-17 contract was approved in June of 2015 with changes to reflect the new time period. The
only changes to the 2017-19 contract is the new time period and a new provision requiring
SLODA to formally obtain an encroachment permit for Farmer’s Market.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The execution of an agreement with the SLODA is not a project under CEQA and therefore, no
environmental review is required.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed agreement does not anticipate changes to the City’s relationship with the DA and
the provision of services to meet each other’s mutual goals. As envisioned in the agreement, the
City will continue to collect the approximately $200,000 in Area assessment revenues and will
pass these funds to the SLODA for services provided in accordance with this Agreement. In
addition, the City will continue to provide support for the special events that the SLODA
provides in under the Agreement. As a result, the proposed agreement has no fiscal impact on the
City’s General Fund. The agreement does provide a modest increase in the costs associated with
supporting traffic control for the weekly Farmer’s Market.
ALTERNATIVES
Do not renew the Agreement with the SLODA. The Council could direct staff to explore
alternatives to contracting with the SLODA for the services provided by this organization. Due
to the ongoing nature of the activities produced by the SLODA that have become hallmarks of
our community, this alternative is not recommended.
Attachments:
a - DPBIA Boundary
b - 2017-19 SLODA Agreement
Packet Pg. 154
13
Packet Pg. 155
13
1
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of this __ day of July, 2017, by and between
the SAN LUIS OBISPO DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION, a 501(c)(6) non-profit
corporation organized under the laws of the State of California, with a place of business at
1108 Garden Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401 ("SLODA"), and the CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city ("City").
RECITALS:
A. On October 6, 1975, the City Council adopted, and subsequently amended on
various occasions, Ordinance 649 (1975 Series) (collectively, "the Ordinance")
creating the Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area ("DPBIA") in the
downtown area of San Luis Obispo, and levying the authorized assessment on all
businesses within the area, and
B. The City and SLODA have benefited from a close working relationship for the
benefit of business and tourism in the downtown area of San Luis Obispo since the
inception of the Downtown Business Improvement Area in 1975 and desire to
continue their relationship for the betterment of tourism and business; and
C. SLODA is uniquely qualified to provide the services contemplated under this
contract due to its intimate knowledge of Downtown, unique connection to
businesses in the Downtown, and its long experience producing and providing
promotional services for the benefit of Association members; and
D. The SLODA has historically added substantial value to the events produced under
contract with the City by utilizing the financial resources of its membership and
dedication of its staff that in total far exceed the DPBIA assessment revenues; and
E. The SLODA brings experienced and competent management of the subcontractors
that it hires for the contracted events; and
F. Both parties acknowledge that the Thursday Night Promotions, Concerts in the
Plaza and Holiday Activities are unique events that bring vibrancy to the
Downtown city streets and public areas;
G. Having determined that promotional activities to benefit business and tourism activities
in the Downtown area of San Luis Obispo are an appropriate use of DPBIA assessment
proceeds, since such activities are expected to maintain and increase revenues derived
by the City from the Downtown area and to preserve and enhance the unique character
of the Downtown for the special benefit of Downtown area businesses, and further,
having determined that SLODA is able to conduct such promotional activities, the City
Council desires to contract with SLODA to conduct promotional activities in the
Downtown area of San Luis Obispo; and
Packet Pg. 156
13
2
H. The City is authorized to enter into a contract to provide services to the members of the
DPBIA and to administer the assessment collected for that purpose; the SLODA, a
501(c)(6) organization, wishes to enter into this contract with the City to provide agreed
upon services to the DPBIA members.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE as follows:
1. Scope of Services. SLODA will conduct promotional activities to benefit business
and tourism activities in the Downtown area of the City, more specifically set forth in this
Agreement as the Scope of Services, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated as if
fully set forth herein, as limited by State law and the Ordinance, and subject to any
modifications approved in writing by the City Manager.
During the term of the contract, the Scope of Services, Exhibit A may be amended by
mutual consent of the parties. The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve periodic
amendments to Exhibit A without further consent by Council to the extent that any such
amendments do not result in the elimination of required Special Events, as set forth in
Exhibit A.
2. Financial Reporting. SLODA will prepare and file with City, consistent with City
policy, quarterly financial reports within 60 days after the end of the quarter showing
qualifying expenditures made by SLODA and shall, upon request by City, produce
supporting invoices, receipts, vouchers and statements showing how the DPBIA revenues
have been expended consistent with this Agreement. Such financial reports shall include a
line-item schedule that matches expenditures with specific, budgeted amounts and
activities. The reports will be filed with the City Finance Director consistent with the City’s
financial reporting policies and practices, and as reasonably requested by the Finance
Director.
In addition to interim quarterly reports, the SLODA shall contract with an
independent certified public accountant to prepare an annual compilation of the SLODA
financial operations related to qualifying revenues and expenses. Said compilation shall
be completed every year, at the end of the contract period and shall show the purposes to
which the DPBIA funds were put such as the name and date of the event and the allocation
of TPBID funds relative to the costs of the event. The compilation shall be conducted in
accordance with accounting standards generally accepted in the United States. The
objective of a compilation is to assist management in presenting financial information in
the form of financial statements without undertaking to obtain or provide any assurance
that there are no material modifications that should be made to the financial statements.
The SLODA fiscal year shall be July 1 to June 30; and the compilation shall be completed
and submitted to the City’s Finance Director within 180 days of the fiscal year end. The
City reserves the right to request an audit of the SLODA financial statements and the
SLODA agrees to comply with such a request, in intervals no more often than every four
years nor less often than every six years.
Packet Pg. 157
13
3
3. Quarterly Activity Reports. At the time the interim quarterly financial reports are
filed, SLODA will also file with the City Manager a report of the activities of SLODA and
its subcontractors and the respective accomplishments of each during the period specified
in the financial report.
4. Term. The term of this Agreement will commence July 1, 2017 ending on June
30, 2019 to match the two year budget cycle of the City. The contract may be renewed
upon approval of the Agreement, including the Scope of Services, by the City Council. The
City or the SLODA may terminate this Agreement and any rights, duties and liabilities
accruing in this Agreement at any time by giving written notice of election to terminate to
the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the end of the fiscal year.
5. DPBIA Funding Restrictions. The parties acknowledge that DPBIA funds shall
be used exclusively for activities within Exhibit A and that all DPBIA funds allocated by
the City shall be subject to the restrictions imposed on DPBIA monies by the Ordinance
and State law.
6. Limited Use of DPBIA Funds. SLODA will use none of the funds it receives
from this Agreement for any purpose not enumerated in the Ordinance, including but not
limited to, any expense (including administration and overhead) in support of a SLODA
Political Action Committee or any other political entity or activity. The City recognizes
that the SLODA may engage in su ch activities on behalf of its members, independent of
its contract with the City and does not attempt through this Agreement to limit those
activities, so long as such activities do not utilize DPBIA funds.
7. Accounting for DPBIA Assessments. DPBIA funds may be used to finance fund-
raising activities intended to generate additional revenue for use by the SLODA. However,
the sum of all DPBIA funds used for this purpose shall be accounted for and proceeds from
the fund-raiser equal to that sum shall be used for purposes stated in the Ordinance and
conforming to the purposes of the assessment as defined by State law. Further, such use of
DPBIA funds shall be specifically described in the periodic reports described in paragraph
2 of this Agreement.
8. City Support for SLODA Activities. The City will continue to provide staff
support and services in accordance with the SLODA Scope of Services attached hereto as
Exhibit A. The SLODA shall pay to the City the sum of One Hundred Forty Dollars and
15/100 ($140.15) per market for set up and removal of barricades during the 2017-18 fiscal
year. Said sum shall be adjusted each July 1 by the Consumer Price Index-All Urban Areas
(CPI-U) for February as published annually in March by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, all
cities average for the prior calendar year.
It is also agreed that SLODA will reimburse City for all costs incurred by City in providing
services during the term of this Agreement relating to other SLODA events or promotional
services not addressed in this contract. These costs will be determined and certified in
accordance with City policies applicable to other non-profit organizations and City will
Packet Pg. 158
13
4
provide SLODA with invoices for such services, which will be due and payable by SLODA
consistent with standard City policies and practices.
9. Monthly Remittance of DPBIA Funds to the SLODA. The City will cause to be
paid to SLODA the total amount of DPBIA funds collected by the City during each month
within thirty (30) days of the end of the month. The City recognizes that the SLODA relies
on the City to collect the assessment and to enforce the payment of the assessment via its
business license process. To insure compliance with the Business Tax and License rules,
the City and the Downtown Association collaborate to encourage compliance. All business
within the City are subject to the same rules and same enforcement procedures.
10. City Staff Rights to Attend SLODA Board Meetings. SLODA shall continue to
notify the City via the City Manager or his/her appointed representative of all regular
meetings of the Board of Directors and shall have the right to attend all such regular
meetings.
11. Independence of SLODA. Neither the City nor any of its officers or employees
will have any control over the conduct of SLODA or any of its employees, except as
provided above, and SLODA expressly warrants not in any manner or at any time to
represent that its officers, agents, servants or employees are in any manner the officers,
agents, servants or employees of the City, it being distinctly understood that SLODA is
and at all times will remain as to the City, an independent contractor, and the obligations
of SLODA to the City is solely as prescribed by this Agreement.
12. Electricity and Tree Lighting Program. The City and the SLODA have agreed
to work toward accomplishing additional goals set forth in Exhibit B relating to electricity
for Thursday Night Promotions (TNP) and tree lighting. These provisions are separate and
distinct from the Exhibit A Scope of Services for which DPBIA funds are provided.
Furthermore, the provisions of Exhibit B shall survive termination of this contract.
13. Farmer’s Market Encroachment Permit. By no later than June 30, 2018,
SLODA shall obtain from City an encroachment permit for its Farmer’s Market. At all
times thereafter, SLODA shall have an encroachment permit for its Farmer’s Market
activity. The encroachment permit will be valid for one year and may be extended by City
upon SLODA submitting proof of adequate insurance.
14. Dispute Resolution between SLODA and its Subcontractors. SLODA shall
include a dispute resolution clause in all contracts with subcontractors furnishing services
related to contracted events. The dispute resolution clause shall provide a clear and concise
process for resolution of disputes that arise between the SLODA and its subcontractors.
15. Assignment. This Agreement contemplates that SLODA will render special
services that it is uniquely able to provide, and it is recognized by the parties that an
inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the ability of SLODA to
render these special services. Neither this Agreement nor any interest in this Agreement
may be assigned by SLODA, except that SLODA may, on written consent of the City
Packet Pg. 159
13
5
Manager or designee obtained in advance, assign any moneys due, or to become due, to
SLODA for purposes consistent with this Agreement. SLODA agrees not to subcontract
any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for in this Agreement, except
that SLODA may enter into subcontracts for the sole purpose of carrying out promotional
activities within the scope of the Ordinance with the consent of City. Nothing contained in
this Agreement is intended to or will be construed as preventing SLODA from employing
or hiring as many employees as it may deem necessary for the proper and efficient
execution of this Agreement.
16. Insurance. SLODA shall obtain and maintain insurance as set forth in Exhibit C
hereto, the requirements of which are incorporated herein. Each insurance policy shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled by either party
except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice to City, and shall be primary and not
contributing to any other insurance or self-insurance maintained by City.
SLODA shall deliver to City certificates of insurance and original endorsements for
approval as to sufficiency and form prior to the start of performance hereunder. The
certificate and endorsements for each insurance policy shall contain the original signature
of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. "Claims made"
policies of insurance are not acceptable unless the City Risk Manager determines that
"occurrence" policies are not available in the market for the risk being insured. If a "claims
made" policy is accepted, it must provide for an extended reporting period of not less than
one hundred eighty (180) days. Such insurance as required herein shall not be deemed to
limit SLODA's liability relating to performance under this Agreement. City reserves the
right to require complete certified copies of all said policies at any time. Any modification
or waiver of the insurance requirements herein shall only be made with the approval of the
City Risk Manager. The procuring of insurance shall not be construed as a limitation on
liability or as full performance of the indemnification provisions of this Agreement.
To the extent that SLODA subcontracts certain activities pursuant to paragraph 14 of this
Agreement, SLODA may comply with the requirements of this paragraph 15 by providing
certificates of insurance naming SLODA and the City of San Luis Obispo as separate
“additional insured” under the subcontractor's insurance, providing that the subcontractor's
insurance meets or exceeds the insurance requirements of this paragraph 15, all subject to
the approval of the City Risk Manager.
17. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. SLODA shall protect, defend, indemnify
and hold City, its officials, employees, and agents (collectively in this Section referred to
as "City") harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, losses,
damages, and liabilities, whether or not reduced to judgment, which may be asserted
against City arising from or attributable to or caused directly or indirectly by SLODA,
SLODA's employees or agents in the performance of work under this Agreement, or any
alleged negligent or intentional act, omission or misrepresentation by SLODA, SLODA's
employees or agents, which act, omission or misrepresentation is connected in any way
with performance of work under this Agreement. If it is necessary for purposes of resisting,
adjusting, compromising, settling, or defending any claim, demand, cause of action, loss,
Packet Pg. 160
13
6
damage, or liability, or of enforcing this provision, for City to incur or to pay any expense
or cost, including attorney's fees or court costs, SLODA agrees to and shall reimburse City
within a reasonable time. SLODA shall give City notice of any claim, demand, cause of
action, loss, damage or liability within ten (10) calendar days.
18. Notice. Any notices to be given under this Agreement, or otherwise, may be given
by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, addressed to the party intended to receive the
same, at its address and by depositing the same in the U. S. Postal Service as regular mail,
postage prepaid. When so given, notice will be effective from the time of mailing of the
notice. For these purposes, unless otherwise provided in writing, the address of the City
and the proper person to receive any notices on its behalf is the City Manager, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo and the address of the SLODA is 1108 Garden Street, Suite 210,
San Luis Obispo, California 93401.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this _____
day of , 2017.
SAN LUIS OBISPO DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION,
A 501(c)(6) Corporation.
By:
Dominic Tartaglia, Executive Director,
SLO Downtown Association
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By:
Heidi Harmon, Mayor
ATTESTATION:
By:
Carrie Gallagher, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
Packet Pg. 161
13
7
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
I. SPECIAL EVENTS:
The events and/or activities set forth and defined below are Special Events the continuation
of which the City considers integral to the fulfillment of SLODA’s obligations under the
Agreement. As such, the City agrees to continue to provide, at the mutually agreed cost to
the SLODA, the enumerated municipal services that have traditionally been provided to
the SLODA in conjunction with the events/activities as set forth below and the SLODA
shall continue to provide the following Special Events and related services to the
Downtown:
1) Holiday Activities: Holiday Activities include some of the County’s most popular
holiday events including:
a) The Annual Holiday Parade, a free event that features nearly 100 entries and
winds its way through the Downtown streets early in the holiday season;
b) Santa’s House in Mission Plaza, a free service opening the day after Thanksgiving
and operating daily through Christmas Eve. Thousands of children visit the House
from all over the county and beyond;
c) Classic Carousel in Mission Plaza, a contracted activity by the Downtown
Association. Each year, an independent operator brings in a full sized carousel that
is set up adjacent to Santa’s House and operates the same hours as the House.
2) Concerts in the Plaza: Concerts in the Plaza are held in Mission Plaza showcasing
local (tri county area) bands, providing the highest level of quality in all aspects of the
production such as stage and sound, promotional marketing materials, a high level of
staffing and security, dozens of volunteers and quality food and beverage vendors. The
Downtown Association will be given priority in Mission Plaza for the Friday night
concert series beginning the first Friday in June and ending on the thirteenth contiguous
Friday hence, subject to the following:
a) In those instances, where the concert conflicts with Mission College Preparatory
School graduation activities that take place in Mission Plaza, the series will begin
on the second Friday in June allowing Mission College Preparatory School priority
use of the plaza for graduation.
b) In years when the series starts on the second Friday in June, it will still run the full
thirteen contiguous Fridays.
3) Thursday Night Promotions: (TNP): an event that showcases Downtown and
Downtown businesses to visitors, both locals and tourists, and offers opportunities for
Downtown businesses, other eligible non-Downtown businesses, produce vendors,
non-profit organizations and other community groups to sell their products and
services, fundraise, or provide information. TNP is also often generically referred to
Packet Pg. 162
13
8
as “Farmers Market,” “the market,” “Thursday night,” or other various combinations
of those names.
City Services in Support of Special Events
City services in support of the above events have traditionally included the following,
which will continue uninterrupted:
1. Public safety support at levels determined appropriate by the City, including
holiday parade escort.
2. Placement and removal of street barricades and coordination of street closures for
holiday activities and TNP
3. Placement and removal of City-owned portable restrooms for TNP.
4. Banner placement and advertising at 50% of standard City fees. (Note: SLODA
shall retain its priority position with regard to the placement of street banners that
promote activities that benefit tourism and business in the district, in addition to the
Special Events above, within the scope of the Agreement, but shall be charged fees
consistent with City policy for the placement of such banners)
5. Special Events Permit processing at 50% of standard City fees
6. Street clean-up following Special Events
7. Holiday tree placement and removal unless and until alternatives for a live tree are
completed and a live tree is installed.
8. Free rental of Mission Plaza for placement of Santa’s House and carousel and for
Concerts in the Plaza.
SLODA Services in Support of Special Events:
SLODA services in support of the above events have traditionally included the following,
which will continue to enhance the success of the events:
1. Booth space at TNP for City departments at no cost subject to space availability
2. Noticing via meter flyers for TNP
3. Marketing and coordination of City-related events at TNP at no cost including but
not limited to:
a. Fire Prevention Night
b. Law Enforcement Night
c. Public Works Night
d. Arbor Day activities
e. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation activities
f. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities activities
g. San Luis Obispo Transit activities
h. City of San Luis Obispo tourism activities
II. ONGOING SERVICES:
In addition to the Special Events set forth above, SLODA shall provide, as needed, the
following Ongoing Services to the Downtown. The costs of any City services required or
requested in support of these Ongoing Services shall be allocated to the SLODA consistent
Packet Pg. 163
13
9
with City policies applicable to other not for profit entities and pursuant to the terms of the
Agreement.
1. Parking/Transportation
a. Distribute employee and customer parking brochures to targeted groups.
b. Work closely with City staff to analyze and make recommendations to the City Council
on ways to address employee parking issues.
c. Work closely with City staff on the development of downtown construction public
information programs.
d. Work closely with City staff on parking management plan and any parking and access
programs that benefit the community.
2. Downtown Maintenance
a. Work closely with City staff to give input on sidewalk scrubbing schedule.
b. Disseminate cleanliness and safety information to members through publications and
presentations.
c. Work with City staff to get trash and recycling receptacles cleaned.
d. Continue Downtown Forester program in assisting with tree maintenance.
3. Economic Development Issues
a. Work closely with City staff to implement the City’s Economic Development Strategic
Plan to maintain Downtown retail health.
b. Work closely with City staff on issues related to undesirable and/or criminal behaviors
in the Downtown, such as aggressive panhandling, graffiti, and drunk-in-public
behaviors.
c. Continue to coordinate with City and Chamber of Commerce to get information to
visitors on Downtown retail/shopping opportunities.
d. Continue collaboration efforts with the Chamber of Commerce and other business and
visitor groups to increase effectiveness of local and regional marketing.
e. Get word out to Downtown retailers and restaurants when conferences/events are in
town and encourage them to do direct marketing/outreach as provided to the SLODA
via the City’s tourism efforts.
4. Organizational Capacity
Keep the City apprised of and included in the process of any update to the SLODA’s long
term strategy for the fiscal sustainability, including strategies to:
a. Maintain economic vitality and independence of the organization
b. Identify options for development of other funding sources to be considered, pursued,
and/or secured to supplement the organization’s activities;
c. Evaluate internal organization, and committee structure, and allocation of resources to
identify changes needed to most effectively implement SLODA’s mission and goals.
Packet Pg. 164
13
10
EXHIBIT B
ELECTRICITY AND TREE LIGHTING
Electrical Wiring in Higuera Street for Future Electrical Connections
In 2008 and 2012 the City facilitated the installation of electrical conduit and service
connections in Higuera Street to provide electrical connections for use by Thursday Night
Promotions vendors. A further capital project will be required to facilitate additional
connections. The City and SLODA have agreed to work toward accomplishing the
connections over the term of the Agreement. However, the parties recognize that the
completion of such a project will require additional funding and the parties agree that the
cost allocation relating to the provision of such connections and post-installation
maintenance issues, such as electrical service costs, are subject to further negotiation.
Tree Lighting Program
On January 24, 2012, in return for the City’s issuance of a temporary revocable
encroachment permit, SLODA executed an agreement for encroachment within the public
right-of-way for the SLODA Tree Lighting and Power Project. Furthermore, on June 14,
2012, the City and SLODA amended their contract for services dated July 1, 2011, under
which the SLODA was allowed to conduct a Tree Lighting and Power Project consisting
of installation of string lights in trees, installation of electrical boxes to provide the lights
with electricity per City standards, and installation a commemorative plaque to
acknowledge tree lighting donors.
The Tree Lighting and Power Project shall meet the following requirements:
1. The Tree Lighting and Power Project will be allowed on street trees along Higuera
Street between Morro and Garden Streets (the “Project Area”) All areas outside the
Project Area are reserved for the City’s commemorative tree program as established
per Resolution No. 10151 (2010 Series) until such time as the commemorative tree
program is eliminated or the Project Area modified.
2. Trees in the Project Area that have commemorative plaques granted prior to June
14, 2012, in accordance with the City’s planting and commemorative plaque
program, are excluded from the Tree Lighting and Power Project unless written
approval of the commemorative donor to allow inclusion in the Tree Lighting and
Power Program has been obtained by the SLODA.
3. The SLODA may charge a fee to cover the costs of installing, maintaining,
operating (including electricity) and replacing the lighting and plaques otherwise
administering the Tree Lighting Project.
4. SLODA will be entirely responsible for all costs associated with the Tree Lighting
and Power Project and shall comply with the following conditions:
Packet Pg. 165
13
11
a. install, maintain, operate, replace, and remove tree lighting in the Program
Area upon revocation of the encroachment permit issued for the Tree
Lighting and Power Project (unless otherwise agreed in writing by City);
b. purchase, place, maintain, and remove all plaques associated with its
Program upon revocation of the encroachment permit issued for the Tree
Lighting and Power Project (unless otherwise agreed in writing by City);
c. remove any damaged or hazardous plaques when needed or upon request
by the City; and
d. provide lighting of the existing commemorative trees in the Program Area.
e. Plaques shall be no larger than 5” x 6” and shall have wording appropriate
to a public location.
f. All tree lighting shall be placed in accordance with guidance of the City
Arborist to minimize impacts to pruning and other maintenance operations.
g. Any expansion of the Program Area requires the prior written approval of
City before implementation by SLODA.
City will use reasonable caution when completing work in the vicinity of SLODA facilities,
but is not responsible for any damage to SLODA facilities resulting from maintenance
activities or tree pruning. SLODA shall repair any such inadvertent damage to its tree
lighting or plaques or other facilities.
In the event the City must remove any plaque to complete work, the City will return the
plaque to SLODA. SLODA shall reinstall the plaque at SLODA’s expense.
Packet Pg. 166
13
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Department
Prepared By: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT,
INCLUDING 1) RELATED ENTITLEMENTS AND 2) THE CERTIFICATION
OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR). PROJECT
ENTITLEMENTS INCLUDE: 1) SPECIFIC PLAN, 2) GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, 3) VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, AND 4)
INITIATION OF ANNEXATION FOR THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING
AND REVIEW OF A TERM SHEET AS THE BASIS FOR A FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE SITE
INCLUDE UP TO 580 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT; 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE
DEVELOPMENT; A 200-ROOM HOTEL; AND APPROXIMATELY 60.4
ACRES OF THE SITE TO REMAIN FOR AGRICULTURE AND OPEN-
SPACE.
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Planning Commission, adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A),
taking the following actions to approve the San Luis Ranch Project:
1.Certify the Final EIR, adopt appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to allow for potential project
approval, and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; and
2.Find the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan project consistent with General Plan
policies; and
3.Approve the proposed Specific Plan and related project entitlements, including a General
Plan Amendment and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096; and
4.Initiate annexation of the project site by authorizing staff to submit an application for
annexation of the project site to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); and
5.Provide comments and conceptually approve the Term Sheet for the project and authorize
negotiation of a Development Agreement consistent with the terms of the Term Sheet.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is proposed by Coastal Community Builders to enable the
development and agricultural and open space preservation of portions of the 131.3-acre site.
A Final EIR has been prepared for the project, and is avai lable on the City’s website:
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents-
online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-1907
The project has been presented before various City advisory bodies. On June 5, 2017, the
Architectural Review Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project Design
Packet Pg. 167
14
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM FROM JULY 5, 2017
Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council. In addition, the Cultural
Heritage Commission found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance
and historic preservation policies of the General Plan on May 15, 2017.
On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council
certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, including the Vesting Tentative Tract
Map and Term Sheet that provides the basis for a future development agreement. As part of its
Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the Specific
Plan, which are included in the City Council Resolution (Attachment A).
Planned San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area Development
Type Specific Plan Zone % of Site Units Acreage
Planned Development 1
Low-Medium Density Residential NG-10 16.4% 200 units 21.5 acres
Medium Density Residential NG-23 5.5% 100 units 7.3 acres
High Density Residential NG-30 8.4% 246 units 11.0 acres
Potential Additional Units2 34 units n/a
Commercial NC 9.0% 150,000 SF 11.9 acres
Office NC 3.2% 100,000 SF 4.2 acres
Hotel and Conference Center NC 2.7% 200 rooms 3.5 acres
Public Parks 2.1% 2.8 acres
Roads 6.8% 9.0 acres
Agricultural and Open Space
Agriculture AG 39.8% 52.3 acres
Internal Open Spaces OS 5.9% 7.8 acres
1. Planned Development area is based on net site area of approximately 122.5 acres. The gross site area is approximately 131.4 acres, less
approximately 8.9 acres of right-of-way associated with regional roadway improvements.
2. The project receives a density bonus of 80 market-rate units because over 5% of the units proposed will be deed restricted as affordable
to Very Low Income residents. 46 of those density bonus units are provided in the High Density Residential area, and 34 units are
unassigned, but may be located in the commercial area as part of a mixed -use component to the project.
There are five major project components, the key elements of which are summarized in the
Planning Commission staff report of May 24, 2017:
• San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
• General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning
• Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map
• Annexation
• Term Sheet/Development Agreement
The City Council’s role is to review and consider approval of the San Luis Ranch project and
related entitlements, based on project-related input received from the Planning Commission,
other City advisory bodies, and the Airport Land Use Commission. As a necessary step related
to possible project approval, the City Council must certify the Final EIR for the project, adopt the
CEQA Findings, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts determined to
be Significant and Unavoidable (“Class 1 impacts”). If the Council certifies the Final EIR and
Packet Pg. 168
14
approves the project, staff will prepare an application to the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) to initiate the annexation process. Lastly, as part of this review the
Council should provide input and direction about pursuing a development agreement based on
the term sheet that is contained herein.
DISCUSSION
Background
1. Project Description Summary
The project is the development of a major new City neighborhood. The project includes a mix of
residential, commercial, and office uses while preserving nearly half of the site as open space and
agriculture on a 131.3-acre property, as described in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. The intent is
for the project to be consistent with the development parameters described in the City’s 2014
Land Use Element.
If the project is approved, the Specific Plan area would require annexation to the City of San
Luis Obispo. The project is within the City’s Sphere of Influence and Urban Reserve Line, and is
designed to be consistent with both City and Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)
policies, including the requirement that the annexation be compatible with the City’s General
Plan and supportable by the City’s infrastructure.
The project would be constructed in six phases. Phases 1, 2, and 3 would consist of residential
development. Construction is planned to begin in 2018. Phases 4, 5, and 6 would consist of non-
residential construction (retail, office, hotel). The above figure shows the location of proposed
Packet Pg. 169
14
phasing in the context of the Specific Plan. This figure illustrates the relative timing of proposed
development and infrastructure that will be built under the Specific Plan.
Pages 7-23 through 7-28 within Chapter 7 of the draft Specific Plan describe the conceptual
financing strategy for needed major improvements within the Specific Plan area, based on a
Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), described in Section 7.8.1 of the Specific Plan. At this
point, the cost and timing are still preliminary, and will depend on market and other factors. But
in general, the following funding mechanisms are proposed in the Specific Plan:
• Primary Funding Mechanisms
▪ Development Impact Fees
▪ Community Facilities District (CFD)
• Ancillary Funding Mechanisms
▪ City and County Tax Exchange
▪ Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)
▪ Developer Financing
▪ Landscape and Lighting District
▪ Homeowner Association Fees
In general, San Luis Ranch development will pay for needed infrastructure upfront and be
reimbursed for portions beyond its fair share, or it will pay its fair share upfront to contribute to
the eventual construction of a needed improvement. The final infrastructure financing strategy
will be based on fiscal and economic studies that examine the proposed improvements and
timing, and refine the financing and fair share mechanisms needed to deliver a given
infrastructure project. This funding analysis will be provided in detail during the negotiation and
the City Council’s consideration of the Development Agreement.
2. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on eight occasions, once during
the pre-application process, twice to review a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, twice
during the Draft EIR public review period, and three times to consider the project now before the
City Council. On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the
City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, included the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission
recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan, which are discussed in Section 6.0
of this staff report, and included in the City Council Resolution (Attachment A).
3. Previous Advisory Body Review
The project has been considered before various City advisory bodies that have carefully
reviewed and commented on specific aspects of the proposed project that relate to their purview.
On June 5, 2017, the Architectural Review Commission unanimously recommended approval of
the project Design Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council. In addition,
the Cultural Heritage Committee found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation
Packet Pg. 170
14
Ordinance and historic preservation policies of the General Plan on May 15, 2017.
Finally, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has reviewed the project on several
occasions. On April 19, 2017, the ALUC determined that the project was consistent with the
Airport Land Use Plan. Changes to the plan were required, including relocation of 27 dwelling
units that would have otherwise been in a more restrictive airport safety zone. In addition, the
ALUC required that a portion of the commercial area be restricted from including buildings
(though parking lot improvements, landscaping, and other site improvements are allowed). (See
Council Reading file for final ALUC findings and conditions.) The applicant subsequently
updated the Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract map to address these changes, which is the
version of the project recommended by the Planning Commission, and currently being
considered by the City Council.
Attachment C provides a summary of the different advisory bodies that have considered the
project, when these reviews occurred, as well as the purpose and outcome of these meetings.
4. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Conclusions
Consistent with City Council direction, a Draft EIR was prepared for the project, and distributed
for public review from December 9, 2016, to January 30, 2017. The Planning Commission held
two public hearings to solicit input on the Draft EIR, on January 11 and January 25, 2017.
Portions of the Draft EIR related to the project’s energy impacts were recirculated for 45 days,
from March 3 through April 17, 2017. Several mitigation measures in the Draft EIR were revised
as a result of these responses to comments, in order to clarify or improve their effectiveness.
The Final EIR concludes that the project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts to:
• Air Quality – consistency with the Clean Air Plan; cumulative impacts related to air
quality
• Cultural Resources – impacts to the existing historic onsite agricultural structures,
known as the San Luis Ranch Complex, as well as cumulative impacts related to
cultural resources
• Land Use – policies to protect historic resources and provisions related to parkland,
as well as policies to achieve of multimodal objectives
• Noise – short-term construction noise
• Transportation – Level of Service impacts to intersection capacities are identified at
Madonna Road/Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road/Froom Ranch Way; bicycle
facility impacts for the Higuera Street segment between Prado and Madonna Road;
and cumulative impacts to the U.S. 101 segment between Los Osos Valley Road and
Madonna Road
The EIR also finds that there will be significant impacts that can be mitigated to less than
significant in the categories of agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise,
recreation, and transportation. Impacts related to aesthetics, greenhouse gas emissions, water
resources, as well as certain issues related to agricultural resources, air quality, hazards,
Packet Pg. 171
14
hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing were found to be less than
significant. Tables ES-1 through ES-3 in the Final EIR Executive Summary (Attachment D) and
at the beginning of the Final EIR summarize the project’s impacts and mitigation measures.
The Final EIR is available at the following website:
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents-
online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-1907
CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The Final EIR must be certified before or concurrent with an action to approve the proposed
project entitlements.
The Planning Commission determined that the Final EIR adequately described and analyzed the
proposed project, and that the document included appropriate mitigation measures to reduce
potential impacts to the extent feasible. These mitigation measures are included in a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program within the Final EIR.
Based on this, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Final
EIR, and to consider the attached CEQA Findings that support the proposed project, including a
Statement of Overriding Considerations to address the identified significant and unavoidable
impacts described in the Final EIR. These are included in Attachment B - Exhibit A (CEQA
Findings).
5. General Plan Guidance and Policy Consistency
The project is based on policy direction included in the General Plan, specifically Land Use
Element Policy 8.1.4, which identifies the San Luis Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP -2),
subject to policies for the development of a specific plan and certain broad development
parameters and principles. For clarity, the entire policy is included within the summary of
relevant General Plan policies as a Council Reading File (EIR Policy Consistency Analysis). In
its Resolution of June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission found that the San Luis Ranch project
was consistent with the City’s General Plan and related policies and standards.
6. Term Sheet, Development Agreement and Infrastructure Financing
Background and Overview
In April 2014, the City Council authorized City staff to begin a process for the City to enter into
a Development Agreement with the project applicant. A Development Agreement is a land use
and planning mechanism that allows public agencies to gain public benefits beyond what would
either be required through a typical planning process or the CEQA process to address identified
impacts related to a project. A Development Agreement typically includes a commitment by the
developer to provide extraordinary benefits. In exchange, a project applicant is provided
assurances related to future development, often with respect to timing. In this particular case, a
Development Agreement cannot be approved unless other necessary underlying planning
entitlements are approved – a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Vesting
Packet Pg. 172
14
Tentative Tract Map. The project site must also be annexed to the City before its provisions
become effective. Importantly, the tentative tract map is specifically conditioned on the City and
the Developer executing a Development Agreement. This means that a final map cannot be
recorded for any phase of the development until this document is approved or the condition is
otherwise modified by the City Council.
Relationship Between Term Sheet and Development Agreement
For this project, a Term Sheet (“Term Sheet”) has been prepared to form the basis of the
Development Agreement. The City Council is requested to provide feedback and approve the
attached Term Sheet. This Term Sheet represents the tentative non-binding understanding
between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and orderly
development of the property such as vesting rights, infrastructure financing, and growth
management. Following review of the Term Sheet by the City Council and once negotiations are
completed, a full Development Agreement will be presented to the Planning Commission before
being presented to the City Council. Staff anticipates returning to the City Council in Fall 2017.
The Development Agreement works in parallel to other entitlements, and in the case of San Luis
Ranch, the proposed conditions of approval require its approval with a detailed infrastructure
financing plan before certain portions of the entitlement can take effect. The Development
Agreement would not change the development parameters included in the Specific Plan, but
would fine-tune their implementation, building on the Conditions of Approval associated with
the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
Term Sheet Review
The City Council is asked to approve the Term Sheet as the basis for a Development Agreement.
The attached Term Sheet (Attachment C) covers 26 areas, ranging from required terms such as
length of term and permitted uses, to subject areas that are unique to the San Luis Ranch Project
such as water rights, dedication of public lands, growth management ordinance, infrastructure
requirements, new taxes, fees and exactions.
Staff will provide an overview of the key points of the term sheet at the City Council meeting.
The Term Sheet is intentionally broad because its terms are based on the totality of the project as
embodied in the Specific Plan, Conditions of Approval, Development Plan, Property Tax
Exchange Agreement1, EIR, and various statutes and municipal code requirements. Once it is
clear what the entitlements include in their totality, a full fiscal analysis will be prepared as basis
for discussing extraordinary public benefits and the project’s carrying capacity in terms of
infrastructure beyond its fair share.
If the Term Sheet is approved, staff anticipates returning to the Planning Commission in Fall
2017 with a draft Development Agreement. At that hearing, the Planning Commission will be
required to make the following findings (17.94.100) when making a recommendation to the City
Council, who would then consider the Development Agreement for possible approval:
1 A property tax exchange agreement is required to be negotiated between the City and the County as part of the
annexation process. The agreement details the distribution of taxes, including property and sales taxes, in the newly
annexed area. The agreement is based on a master agreement that the County and all of the cities in the County have
agreed to follow.
Packet Pg. 173
14
17.94.100 Planning commission hearing and recommendation.
The commission shall consider the proposed development agreement and shall make its
recommendation to the council. The recommendation shall include whether or not the
proposed development agreement meets the following findings:
A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any
applicable specific plan;
B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other
applicable ordinances and regulations;
C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more
comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or
necessary public improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the
development agreement with the applicant; and
D. The proposed project and development agreement:
1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working
in the surrounding area;
2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent
land uses; or
3. Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. (Ord. 1134 § 1
(part), 1989)
The City Council will then be in a position to review and consider the Develop Agreement. This
too is anticipated to occur in the Fall 2017.
7. Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map
The project includes a Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map (See Council Reading
File), which addresses future residential development within the Specific Plan area. The map
includes details that go well beyond those included in the Specific Plan, including information on
lot locations, roadways, drainage, grading, and other information typically associated with
Tentative Maps. The Tentative Map would facilitate development within the areas it covers. It is
consistent with the Specific Plan - implementing its policies, zoning standards, and Design
Guidelines. The Map also includes details regarding proposed roadways and circulation
improvements.
Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Map are included in the attached Resolution
(Attachment A). These conditions cover issues ranging from fire safety; transportation
infrastructure requirements; dedications and easements; utilities; grading, drainage, storm water,
and other infrastructure requirements; air quality; relocation of historic structures; avigation
easements; affordable housing; and natural resource protection. These are separate from, and in
addition to, the mitigation measures and monitoring program that are included in the Final EIR.
Staff’s review of the Tentative Map is that, as conditioned, it is consistent with the Specific Plan,
both in terms of development potential and design. The basic development parameters allowed
under the Map are described above, and previously in more detail in the May 24 P lanning
Packet Pg. 174
14
Commission staff report for the project.
A future Tract Map (or Maps) would be required for the multi-family and commercial phases
(Phases 3-6) of the project prior to approval of development within those portions of the Specific
Plan.
8. Parks
As required by Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, the San Luis Ranch project is required to provide
5.8 acres of developed parkland. The project is providing 2.8 acres of developed parkland on
site. Therefore, funding for 3.0 acres of developed parkland is required for the project to offset
its requirement. The following table identifies the total amount of in-lieu fees necessary for the
project to meet its full park requirements. The final fee amounts are subject to change based on
the final acreage of developed parkland constructed across all phases of the project.
Unit Type Parkland Cost Per
Unit1
Park Improvement
Cost Per Unit2
In-Lieu Fee Requirement
(Total * 52%3)
Single Family (200 units) $5,839 $6,585 $1,292,096
Multi-Family (380 units) $4,630 $4,899 $1,882,930
Total = $3,175,026
1. Current City of San Luis Obispo Parkland In-Lieu Fee Amount.
2. Most recent cost estimate for park improvement costs (Orcutt Area Neighborhood Park).
3. The in-lieu fee requirement calculated as the difference between the 2.8-acre neighborhood park and the
5.8-acre policy minimum requirement for improved parkland.
Prado Road Interchange
The Prado Rd. Interchange is a key piece of infrastructure associated with the development of
this site. Both the Land use and Circulation Element of the General Plan contain key
performance measures for the development project regarding the interchange project. The San
Luis Ranch EIR performed substantial technical review of the proposed project and area
transportation infrastructure. The EIR concluded that existing infrastructure along with proposed
improvements of the project (with required mitigation measures) would allow the first phase of
development to commence without the need for the overpass or interchange. The EIR concluded
that phase two of the development project would require construction of the Prado Rd. Overpass
and NB ramps to offset project traffic on area roadways.
The EIR further concluded that the full interchange (addition of SB Ramps) are necessary to
mitigate full City buildout of development along with growth from regional traffic. The initial
phase of the interchange project can be designed and built in a multi-phase format such that the
additional SB Ramps can be constructed when necessary with little impact to the initial
interchange project. All right of way for the full interchange will be required to be dedicated
prior to recordation of the subdivision map.
The interchange project will be a City lead project. Advance development work – funded by the
applicant – has been underway for the last year with a Project Study Report (PSR) being
processed with Caltrans. The City and CalTrans have developed a cooperative agreement for
project processing that identifies a planned opening year of 2021-22 which coincides with the
Packet Pg. 175
14
tentative timing of phase 2 of the development project. The recently adopted 2017-19 Financial
Plan includes funding for continuation of development of the interchange with design and
environmental work in the next 2-3 year period. The San Luis Ranch project will play a critical
role in establishing the funding mechanism to deliver this infrastructure. A condition of the map
has been constructed that prohibits Phase 2 of the development from moving forward unless
funding is in hand that allows the City to begin construction. The mechanism to deliver that
funding will be memorialized in the Development Agreement.
The planned interchange (Overpass & NB Ramps) opening year of 2021-22 coincides with the
San Luis Ranch development schedule, as San Luis Ranch proceeds with phase 1 the City will be
concurrently proceeding through the interchange design and permitting process. Barring any
unforeseen issues with permitting the construction plans and permits should be completed and, as
required, the funding will be in hand allowing the City to begin construction of the interchange
(Overpass & NB Ramps) concurrently with Phase 2 of the development.
Community Facilities District
As part of the 2017-2019 Financial Plan, the City Council included new financial policies which
establish a framework for land based financing. For the San Luis Ranch project, it is anticipated
that a Communities Facilities District (CFD) will be need for both services and infrastructure. A
key requirement of the conditions of approval is that the applicant forego any protest rights
regarding the formation of a CFD.
One of the pillar policies2 of the City’s General Plan is that development should pay its own way
unless the City chooses to pay the costs to obtain community wide benefits. City Staff worked
with the applicant to prepare a detailed fiscal impact analysis of the proposed project. In
summary, the analysis shows that the project will have a positive fiscal impact only if the
commercial portions of the project are built. Phases 4, 5, and 6 are the later phases and are
commercial. In summary, the analysis shows that at the end of Phase 3, revenues will be
approximately $195,000 less than expenditures. By Phase 6, revenues will exceed expenditures
by nearly $1 million dollars. Given the uncertainty and timing of the commercial phases, a CFD
for services will be formed to fund this interim shortfall.
CFD’s can also be used to fund any gap in infrastructure financing and can be used as either a
source of reimbursement or to fund costs in excess of any fair share requirements. General Plan
and Specific Plan Policies, development standards, mitigation measures and conditions of
approval in combination require a significant amount of both in tract and offsite infrastructure to
facilitate the orderly development of this area. A preliminary analysis concludes that the
development project has the capacity to generate approximately $15 million of CFD revenue for
both services and infrastructure over a 30-year timeframe. The exact amount is still be analyzed
and will be part of a separate report brought to the City Council during the formation of the
CFD.
Next Steps
2 1.13.9. Costs of Growth: The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development be borne by the new
development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall
consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new services and facilities which are
required to serve the project and which are reasonably related to the new growth attributable to the development.
Packet Pg. 176
14
If the City Council certifies the EIR, approves the Specific Plan and related entitlements, as well
as taking the other necessary actions, these are the next steps in the process:
• Prepare Development Agreement. City staff would work with the applicant to prepare a
Development Agreement based on the approved Term Sheet and technical fiscal analysis.
• City Council Formally Initiates Annexation Request. The City Council will forward a
request for annexation to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). City staff
will prepare the annexation application and initiate negotiations with the County on taxes
• Planning Commission Consideration of Development Agreement. The Planning
Commission would consider the Development Agreement, and forward its
recommendations to the City Council.
• City Council Consideration of Development Agreement. The City Council would
consider approval of the Development Agreement, based on Planning Commission
recommendations.
• LAFCo Consideration of Annexation. LAFCo will consider the City’s application for
annexing the project area into the City.
• AB 1600 Update and Establish CFD. After a joint Planning Commission/City Council
study session, the City Council will consider an update of the AB 1600 fee program, and
the establishment of a Community Facilities District (CFD), both of which will be
necessary in order to implement development under the Specific Plan.
• Project Development. Once the Development Agreement is approved, annexation has
occurred, and fee structures are in place, the City’s approved project entitlements will
become effective, including Development Agreement provisions. Project development
could then commence, pursuant to required regulatory resource agency permitting.
CONCURRENCES
The City’s review of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan has involved all City departments
involved in the development review process. Conditions of approval or mitigation measures will
be implemented to ensure that the project is carried out in a manner that is consistent with City
standards. In addition, the Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the project is
consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan were updated in 2014, they
were accompanied by a fiscal analysis that identified the overall fiscal impact that build-out of
the General Plan would have on the city’s ability to continue to provide the high level of service
expected by our community. This look at the fiscal impact of the City’s land use plan is an
essential aspect of land use planning in California, where property tax growth is statutorily
limited. As a result, communities have to be careful to balance land uses between commercial
activities that produce net revenues to support City operations, and residential uses that cost
more to support than they produce in direct revenues.
Normally, individual projects are not accompanied by project-specific fiscal analyses. In the case
of San Luis Ranch, a detailed fiscal analysis has been prepared for a few key reasons:
Packet Pg. 177
14
1. The size of the project warrants a project-specific look.
2. The phasing of the project could result in short term fiscal impacts that would limit the
ability of the City to maintain or deliver public facilities in the earlier phases of the
project. This may result in the need for a Community Facilities District to support project
maintenance or infrastructure costs.
3. Negotiations with the developer regarding the development agreement relies on a detailed
understanding of the specific fiscal effects of the project.
4. Discussions with the County regarding the tax exchange agreement are also informed by
a more detailed understanding of the tax revenue and costs that will be generated by the
project.
The fiscal impact analysis for the San Luis Ranch project was prepared by Applied Development
Economics. This is the same firm that prepared the fiscal and economic analysi s for the General
Plan update. A few of the key findings from the report include:
1. At full build out, the project is estimated to generate about $2.5 million per year in
General Fund revenues and $1.5 million per year in municipal service costs ($2017). As
noted in this report, projections show that there will be periods that expenditures exceed
revenues for the first phases.
2. It should be noted that the City has made investments and anticipates additional future
investments in circulation infrastructure and other public facilities that benefit the
proposed project site.
3. To the extent this project generates positive net revenue for the City General Fund, those
revenues may be needed to service debt for these public investments that are not funded
through direct development impact fees.
4. The residential units would be built in the first three phases and all show a negative fiscal
impact. The City contemplates establishing a Community Facilities District (CFD) to
help mitigate this adverse fiscal impact.
5. The hotel would be built in Phase 4 and represents the single highest fiscal net revenue of
any of the land uses in the project.
6. The office development would be built in Phase 5 and produces a negative fiscal impact,
mainly because the property tax from the non-residential development would go to the
County rather than the City and office space does not generate much sales tax to help
defray the costs of services.
7. The retail commercial development in Phase 6 would generate substantial sales tax and
also produce a significant fiscal benefit similar to the hotel.
In conclusion, the San Luis Ranch Project is expected to have a net positive fiscal impact on the
City, however, a portion of those revenues will be needed for infrastructure that is expected to
benefit the City as a whole. In addition, the phasing of the project presents some fiscal impacts in
the first phases that may be addressed by the establishment of a Community Facilities District to
ensure that the City has sufficient resources to provide urban services and maintain public
facilities prior to project build-out.
Packet Pg. 178
14
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue consideration of the project entitlements. The City Council may continue its
review of the San Luis Ranch project to a date certain (July 18, 2017) if additional time
or information is needed to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction
should be provided to staff so that it can be presented on July 18.
2. Direct changes to the project proposal. The City Council may direct staff and the
applicant to make specific changes to the project. Direction on changes should be specific
and within the scope of the environmental document prepared for the project. For
example, the Council could direct the applicant to reduce the number of units proposed
for the project because a smaller project is evaluated in the Final EIR. However, direction
to increase the number of residential units would require additional environmental review
causing substantial delay to the entitlement process.
3. Deny the project. The City Council may deny the project, based on findings that the
project is not consistent with the General Plan, or that the project benefits do not
outweigh its negative effects. This action is not recommended because the project
appears to be consistent with the General Plan, and the Final EIR for the project has
identified mitigation measures that will reduce most project-related impacts to less than
significant levels. Proposed Findings of Overriding Consideration recommended by the
Planning Commission illustrate how the benefits of the project outweigh its negative
effects.
The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, FEIR, and Tentative Tract Map can be found online at the
following location: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/san-luis-ranch
Attachments:
a - Resolution
b - Exhibit A - San Luis Ranch CEQA Findings
c - Advisory Body Review Summary and Project Responses
d - San Luis Ranch Final EIR Exec Summary
f - Council Reading File - ALUC Findings and Conditions
g - Council Reading File - Policy Consistency Analysis
h - Council Reading File - Vesting Tentative Tract Map
e - Development Agreement Term Sheet
Packet Pg. 179
14
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL EIR FOR AND
APPROVING THE SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT, INCLUDING A
SPECIFIC PLAN, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PREZONING,
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3096,
INITIATION OF ANNEXATION FOR THE PROJECT, AND TERM SHEET
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1035 MADONNA ROAD (SPEC/ANNX/ER-
1502-2015)
WHEREAS, on June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
recommended the City Council 1) certify the Final EIR for the San Luis Ranch project; and 2)
approve the San Luis Ranch project, including all related entitlements, consisting of the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, prezoning the site in anticipation of annexation,
Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3096, and Term Sheet; and 3) initiate an
annexation application to the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on
July 5, 2017 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for
the purpose of considering SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015, which includes entitlements consistent
with the Planning Commission recommendation of June 7, 2017, including a Specific Plan that would
allow up to 580 residential units, 250,000 square feet of commercial development, and other uses on
a 131-acre site, with a and Vesting Tentative Tract Map that would accommodate the residential
portion of the Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required
by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of
the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said
hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Final EIR, CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council hereby
certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, and adopts the following CEQA Findings in support of the San Luis Ranch
Project:
1. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was prepared
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA
Guidelines, adequately addressing impacts associated with the proposed project; and
Packet Pg. 180
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 1
R ______
2. The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as proposed based on the attached Findings
and Statement of Overriding Considerations prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15091 and 15093, and this approval incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as
applicable to VTM #3096, as detailed below, and described more fully in the attached “Findings
of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations” document.
3. All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR, and
reduced to the extent feasible, provided the following mitigation measures are incorporated
into the project and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
SAN LUIS RANCH FEIR MITIGATION MEASURES
Agricultural Resources Mitigation
AG-1. Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits the project
proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland (Prime Farmland,
Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the site that is permanently
converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project development, one (1) acre of land of
comparable agricultural productivity shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to
agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to
maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may
be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project
applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall
be satisfied by the applicant through:
1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland
conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity which has been approved by the
City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently
preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall
therefore total a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on-
and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to
the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s
Natural Resources Manager; or
2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City,
such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be applied toward the future
purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County,
together with an endowment amount as may be required. The payment amount shall be
determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or
3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved by the City and
that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future perpetual
conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation mechanism to
preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County. The
amount of the payment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser;
or
Any combination of the above.
Packet Pg. 181
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
R ______
AG-3(a). Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The following language shall be added
to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan:
“Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of public
access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g., fencing, signs,
etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as part of purchase or lease
agreements.”
AG-3(b). Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City to fund
installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to
minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas.
AG-3(c). Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and pesticide drift to affect
future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans
include planting of a windrow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom
Ranch Way at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations.
Air Quality Mitigation
AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of individual projects
within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to encourage employers within the
proposed commercial, office, and hotel components of the project to implement telecommuting
programs and include teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which
will allow employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area.
AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects shall implement the following
dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance with SLOAPCD
requirements.
• Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency shall be required
whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD-
approved dust suppressant shall be used whenever possible, to reduce the amount of potable
water used for dust control;
• All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape
plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following completion of any soil disturbing
activities;
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after
initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until
vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical
soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible
after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
Packet Pg. 182
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
R ______
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at
the construction site;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain
at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer)
in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114;
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off
trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads.
Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans;
and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust
emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust
complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust
offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in
progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD
Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. The following standard
air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction activities at the project
site:
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications;
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle
diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road);
• Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road
heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification standard for
on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-Road Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their fleet that meet
the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g. captive or NOX exempt area
fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative compliance;
• On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of
Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with
gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on
highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation
specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
1. Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5-minutes at any location,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and,
2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air
conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a
sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a
restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
• Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in
Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-Road Diesel regulation.
Packet Pg. 183
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 4
R ______
• Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind drivers and
operators of the 5-minute idling limit;
• In addition to the state required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply
with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors:
1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the site.
2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors;
4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as compressed
natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
AQ-2(c). Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction Equipment. The
following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment shall be implemented during
construction activities at the project site, where feasible:
• Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and 2010 on-road
compliant engines where feasible;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2 diesel
particulate filters. These strategies are listed at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm
AQ-2(d). Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels during the architectural
coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels of 50 g/L or less.
AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions reduction measures and
construction practices required to comply with Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a) through AQ-2(d)
shall be documented in a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP) and submitted to
SLOAPCD for review and approval at least three months before the start of construction. The
CAMP shall include a Dust Control Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction
equipment (age, horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip
schedule, construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the
Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring the project
below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site mitigation shall be
implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and ROG emissions to below the
Tier 1 threshold.
AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
applicant shall define and incorporate into the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan standard emission
reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce emissions to
below daily threshold levels. Emission reduction measures shall include, but would not be limited
to:
Packet Pg. 184
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 5
R ______
• Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24 requirements (used in
the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent with 2016 Title 24 requirements,
whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach the 20 percent rating cannot be double counted;
• Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low-impact hydro,
biomass and bio-gas); and
• In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in the SLO Car
Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote the program in their
communication tools.
AQ-3(b). Off-Site Mitigation. If implementation of standard emission reduction measures from
the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook described in Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) is
insufficient to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels, then the applicant shall coordinate
with SLOAPCD to provide funding for off-site emission reduction measures to reduce emissions
to below daily threshold levels. In accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess
emissions shall be multiplied by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s
current Carl Moyer Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site mitigation
amount. This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project to determine total off-
site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may include, but would not be limited to:
• Developing or improving park-and-ride lots;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood combustion
devices;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices;
• Constructing satellite worksites;
• Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and heavy-duty vehicles;
• Replacing/re-powering transit buses;
• Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger or maintenance
vehicles);
• Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program;
• Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road vehicles;
• Re-powering marine vessels;
• Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary engines;
• Installing bicycle racks on transit buses;
• Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses, transit buses or
construction fleets;
• Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling stations for
CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.);
• Funding expansion of existing transit services;
• Funding public transit bus shelters;
• Subsidizing vanpool programs;
• Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs;
• Contributing to funding of new bike lanes;
• Installing bicycle storage facilities; and
• Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City or County
Bicycle Master Plans.
Packet Pg. 185
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 6
R ______
Biological Resources Mitigation
BIO-1(a). Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following general wildlife
Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction activity within the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan Area:
• No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction activities.
• All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from the work
site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly disposed of at an
appropriate site.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at least 100 feet
from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain toward aquatic habitat. A
plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any accidental spills prior to the
onset of work activities. All workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take
should an accidental spill occur.
• Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials shall be
provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants shall be cleaned from
the project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB).
• Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis Channel,
the drainage features shall be fenced with orange construction fencing and signed to prohibit
entry of construction equipment and personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should
be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall
be maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development. Once all
phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be removed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate erosion control
BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented to minimize adverse
effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting shall be utilized on site.
• Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to ensure that wildlife
species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks since the equipment was last parked.
Any sensitive wildlife species found during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the
area by a qualified biological monitor or otherwise trained personnel.
• All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks.
• Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist prior to
construction to confine access routes and construction areas.
• Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to avoid impacts
to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period) species. No construction night
lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the top of the Prefumo Creek bank.
• Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a qualified biologist
such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San Luis Channel.
• All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species that
accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open for the shortest period
necessary to complete required work.
Packet Pg. 186
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 7
R ______
• Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to minimize the
amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall
be cited to avoid high quality habitat and minimize habitat fragmentation.
• In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a biological monitor
shall be present during all such activities with the authority to stop or redirect work as needed
to protect biological resources.
BIO-1(b). Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior to the initiation of
construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant shall ensure all
personnel associated with project construction attend a Worker Environmental Awareness
Program (WEAP) training.
• The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special
status resources that may occur in the project area. The specifics of this program shall include
identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and
general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of
construction and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within
the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution
to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of the
project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer documenting they have
attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them.
BIO-1(c). Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact Avoidance and
Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are implemented to avoid and
minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two-striped garter snake (these reptiles
utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of the proposed measures for western pond
turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two-striped garter snake):
• A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior to the
onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential western pond turtle
habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be injured or killed by work
activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project
site before work activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the
shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be
affected by activities associated with the project.
• Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area necessary
to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle habitat
including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian
areas to the maximum extent practicable.
BIO-1(d). California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and Coast Range Newt Impact
Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall implement the following to avoid and minimize
potential impacts to CRLF. Because coast range newt and western spadefoot are amphibians that
utilize similar habitats to CRLF, implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF
shall be implemented for these species as well.
• Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the capture,
handling, and monitoring of CRLF.
Packet Pg. 187
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 8
R ______
• Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the USFWS that the
biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not authorize the relocation of
CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found within the project site shall be avoided
with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left
the project site on its own.
• Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional areas
shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such as silt fencing) that shall extend
at least three feet above the ground and be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude
CRLF from the project site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be
used. The location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall
remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall
be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly.
• During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or jurisdictional
areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any spadefoot toads that may be
excavated/unearthed with native material or found under vegetation. If the animals are in good
health, they shall be immediately relocated to a designated release area. If they are injured, the
animals shall be turned over to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition
to be released into the designated release area.
• To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved biologist, the
fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force
shall be followed at all times.
BIO-1(e). Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the
following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to steelhead:
• Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a training session
for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will include a description of the
steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are being implemented to conserve this
species for the project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished.
Brochures, books, and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified
person is on hand to answer any questions.
• During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will be properly
contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and disposed of regularly.
Following construction, all trash and construction debris will be removed from the work areas.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at least 100 feet
from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a potential spill would not
drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that drains away from the water source).
The monitor shall ensure that contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such
operations. Prior to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective
response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing
spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur.
• The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for constructio n
activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve the project goals.
• The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek for times of
the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work shall be restricted during
the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should ideally occur during the late summer
and early fall during the driest portion of the year; however, water may still be present during
Packet Pg. 188
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 9
R ______
construction. If work is proposed in the streambed and water is present during construction, a
diversion will be required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance and
minimization measures will apply:
(1) Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile steelhead, shall be
provided through or around the construction site at all times construction is occurring
within the Prefumo Creek streambed.
(2) A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be present onsite during
the diversion installation and dewatering process to capture and relocate any trapped
steelhead and/or other fish. Upon approval from the NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate
these individuals the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat
that is not likely to be affected b y activities associated with the project.
(3) Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen fastened to the intake
hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species from the pump.
(4) Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets installed
upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone. The distance upstream
and downstream for block net installation will depend on the type of construction
activities occurring in the streambed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following BMPs shall
be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation with the City and
appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all attempts to remedy the situation will
commence immediately.
(1) It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the entire
construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance.
(2) The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and sediment control
measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet protections, silt fences, and gravel
bags) prior, during and after storm events, monitoring includes maintaining a file
documenting onsite inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and
a map of remedial implementation measures.
(3) Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials (i.e. soil, spoils,
aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) over 2.0 cubic yards that are not actively
being used, consistent with the applicable construction general permit, or through other
means of erosion control approved by the City (e.g., surrounding with straw bales or silt
fencing). The site shall be maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm
drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses.
(a) Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion and water
pollution will be minimized.
(b) State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied with.
(c) If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be protected
with erosion control measures immediately following grading on the slopes.
(4) Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering Prefumo Creek
during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top of the banks on the west
side of the channel prior to the onset of construction activities.
• The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and overall
performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying and reconciling any
condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if
Packet Pg. 189
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 10
R ______
necessary and will recommend site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and
their habitat.
• Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction activities. A
spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available during construction in
the event that any contaminant is accidentally released.
• In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a)
would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect impacts to steelhead from
the project are reduced as much as practicable.
BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization.
The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential
impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting great blue herons.
• Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or
within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in the
San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis
Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening
Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be
conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through
March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from
February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these periods,
a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue
heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate clustering
monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be conducted. If
clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located, no construction activities
shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s)
until the qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the
grove or the nest(s) are no longer active.
• A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to be
reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to issuance of
grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be
preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but shall not be limited to:
o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress
(Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch
butterfly overwintering.
o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native trees
and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as windbreaks.
o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of
onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may
be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can resume
nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that
creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and that the
relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black-
crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the
City will be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their
property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include:
Packet Pg. 190
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 11
R ______
a. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery,
where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults,
egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of adults
and juveniles shall be made.
b. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified
arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees
onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine
whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests across
Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space.
c. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in
previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys
and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly by
a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons.
BIO-1(g). Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the
following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to nesting birds:
• For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally February 1 to
September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California Fish and Game Code and
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days
prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot
buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted
outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall
be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor species.
Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction
activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all
construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the
nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed and young have
fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer.
• If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be scheduled to
occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14), after fledging and before
the initiation of the nesting season.
BIO-1(h). Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the
following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to roosting bats:
• Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing
structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are present. The survey shall be
conducted during the non-breeding season (November through March). The biologist shall
have access to all interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure,
further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of
roost (day, night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive
exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination with CDFW. These exclusion
measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to exit the structure but are designed so
that the bats may not re-enter the structure.
• If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat as determined
by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project site or at an approved location offsite.
Packet Pg. 191
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 12
R ______
• Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a survey shall
be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the trees proposed for removal or
trimming harbor sensitive bat species or maternal bat colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found,
the qualified biologist, in close coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other
appropriate passive relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be
installed in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices properties to those which
are removed, including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above ground, and thermal
conditions. Maternal bat colonies may not be disturbed.
BIO-2(a). Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio (replaced: removed) for
temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific
mitigation sites and it will be implemented immediately following project completion. The
HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted
by habitat type);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established,
restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be
established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved];
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status,
existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan
[including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and irrigation as
appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly
monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target
acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum,
at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent relative cover by vegetation type;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative impacts to
restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation; and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency
compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism).
BIO-2(b). Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at diameter-at-
breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed).
Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1.
Willows and cottonwoods may be planted from live stakes following guidelines provided in the
California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and
container stock (CDFW 2010).
• Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat Restoration and
Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager.
Packet Pg. 192
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 13
R ______
• The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the planting of
replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that replacement trees may be planted
off-site with approval of the City’s Natural Resource Manager.
• Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees were removed.
All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year following the date upon which the
native trees were removed.
BIO-2(c). Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian Areas. The Froom Ranch
Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas. The placement of
the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall
show the bridge’s placement in relation to existing vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo
Creek.
Cultural Resources Mitigation
CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. In order to implement
Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s
barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main barn shall be developed by a qualified historic
architect. The plan shall include a structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity
and conditions and include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic
integrity is retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved.
CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The applicant shall provide archival
documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as-built and as-found condition in the form of
an Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II documentation. The documentation shall
comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering
Documentation (NPS 1990), and shall include large-format photographic recordation, detailed
historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be
completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS
1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as donated material to the
History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of the documentation shall also be
submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library.
CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A retrospective interpretive display
detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex and the project site, its significance, and its
important details and features shall be developed by the applicant. The information should be
incorporated into a publicly-accessed building on the project site, such as the proposed
Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location.
The display shall include images and details from the HABS documentation described in
Mitigation Measure CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic property. The
content shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural
History (NPS 1983).
Packet Pg. 193
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 14
R ______
CR-2(a). Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance with Conservation and Open
Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal investigator, defined as an archaeologist who
meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified
archaeologist), shall be retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological
resources. Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in the
immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried resources that were not
identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor shall also be present because the area
is a culturally sensitive location. The monitor(s) shall be on -site on a full-time basis during
earthmoving activities, including grading, trenching, vegetation removal, or other excavation
activities.
CR-2(b). Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event that
archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall be halted in the vicinity
of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist can visit the site of discovery and
assess the significance of the cultural resource. In the event that any artifact or an unusual amount
of bone or shell is encountered during construction, work shall be immediately stopped and
relocated to another area. The lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed
resource until a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36 CFR 800.11.1
and CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural materials might include:
ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and manos; chipped stone tools such as
projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone not consistent with the immediate geology such as
obsidian or fused shale; historic trash pits containing bottles and/or ceramics; or structural
remains. If the resources are found to be significant, they must be avoided or will be mitigated
consistent with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Guidelines.
Hazardous Materials Mitigation
HAZ-4. Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, a
contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be graded for
development. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a professional geologist or
environmental professional to determine the presence or absence of contaminated soil in these
areas. The sampling density shall be in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County
Environmental Health Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation.
Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of organochlorine
pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and heavy metals in accordance with
EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil sampling indicates the presence of pesticides or
heavy metals exceeding applicable environmental screening levels, the soil assessment shall
identify the volume of contaminated soil to be excavated.
If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant remed iation,
contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent with construction and an
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared. Cleanup may include excavation,
disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment of conditions subject to regulatory action. All
necessary reports, regulations and permits shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The
contaminated materials shall be remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant
licensed to oversee such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency. The
Packet Pg. 194
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 15
R ______
remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency, such as the San
Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed. Upon
completion of the remediation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report summarizing
the project, the remediation approach implemented, and the analytical results after completion of
the remediation, including all waste disposal or treatment manifests.
HAZ-6. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization:
a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be developed per
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. The plan
shall include appropriate health and safety measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock
beneath the project site. All construction workers that have the potential to come into contact
with contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the requirements
in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and personal protective equipment.
The health and safety plan shall prescribe appropriate respiratory protection for construction
workers.
b.Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using polarized light
microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified laboratory shall be conducted.
Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple locations across the site, and bedrock samples
shall be collected from locations where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is
detected, appropriate regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and
disposal of NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into account the locations
of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and vertical distribution of contaminants
in soil and/or groundwater. The results of the investigation shall be documented in a report that
is signed by a California Professional Geologist. The report shall include recommendations
based upon the findings for additional investigation/remediation if contaminants are detected
above applicable screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose, groundwater and/or soil vapor
extraction, or in situ bioremediation).
c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the event that
NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These procedures shall be followed
to eliminate or minimize construction worker or general public exposure to potential
contaminants in soil. Procedures shall include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover
excavation debris piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and
segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable regulations
associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soil shall be
followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting). These procedures may be subject to
San Luis Obispo APCD requirements under the California ARB ATCM for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations.
Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation
HWQ-1(a). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required actions shall be implemented
pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the project applicant and submitted by the
City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board under the NPDES Phase II program. At a
minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall including the following BMPs:
Packet Pg. 195
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 16
R ______
• The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during project grading and
construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge of sediment-laden runoff into
stormwater facilities;
• Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce sediment transport
during storms;
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes before the onset of
the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th);
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in front of storm
drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th); and/or
• Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal.
HWQ-1(b). Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the applicant shall be required to
manage and control runoff by constructing temporary berms, sediment basins, runoff diversions,
or alternative BMP’s as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal, in order to
avoid unnecessary siltation into local streams during construction activities where grading and
construction shall occur in the vicinity of such streams.
• Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be periodically inspected
and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently document, to the CCRWQCB
satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms and basins during grading.
HWQ-1(c). Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As specified in the SWPPP
and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the applicant shall be required to submit a
Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the Planning Division and City Public Works Director
for approval prior to approval of the VTTM. The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to
minimize erosion and water quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with
the project’s SWPPP. The plans shall include the following:
a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive drought tolerant
species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential. Geotextile fabrics shall be used if
necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is established;
b.Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of 100 feet away
from drainages on the project site; and
c. Erosion control structures shall be installed.
d.Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize removal of
riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO-2[a] and BIO-2[b]).
Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division.
The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control structures prior to beginning of
construction of any structures, subject to review and approval by the City.
HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP devices shall be incorporated into
the stormwater quality system depicted in the Master Drainage Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure
HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the stormwater quality system shall be reviewed and approved
by the City. The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs:
• Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and other pollutants
along corridors of planted grasses.
Packet Pg. 196
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 17
R ______
• Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and nutrients.
HWQ-3(b). Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project applicant shall prepare a
development maintenance manual for the stormwater quality system BMPs (refer to Mitigation
Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance manual shall include detailed procedures for maintenance
and operations of all stormwater facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post-
construction stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that stormwater BMP
devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s maintenance
specifications. The manual shall require that devices be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy
season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The
manual shall also require that all devices be checked after major storm events.
HWQ-3(c). Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report. The property manager(s)
or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works
Department a detailed report prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer addressing the condition of
all private stormwater facilities, BMPs, and any necessary maintenance activities on a semi-
annual basis (October 15th and May 15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and
report submittal shall be recorded against the property.
HWQ-4. Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision. The applicant, in
conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare the CLOMR application and obtain
a LOMR from FEMA.
Noise Mitigation
N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks shall utilize
roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive receptors where possible. The
applicant shall submit a proposed construction vehicle and hauling route for City review and
approval prior to grading/building permit issuance. The approved construction vehicle and
hauling route shall be used for soil hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration
of construction.
N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public service utilities,
or where an exception is issued by the Community Development Department, no operation of
tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair, alteration, or demolition work shall occur
daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or afte r
sunset, such that the sound creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family
residential, 80 dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial
land uses across a residential or commercial property line.
N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all construction
activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be employed to ensure that noise
levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title
9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall include:
• Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
Packet Pg. 197
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 18
R ______
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at the project
boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a sound transmission class (a rating of how
well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25.
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with
factory-recommended mufflers.
• For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas with appropriate
acoustic shielding on building and grading plans. Equipment and shielding shall be installed
prior to construction and remain in the designated location throughout construction activities.
• Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power tools.
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles,
along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM
and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on
Sundays or official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and affected uses.
N-1(d). Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise Complaints. The
contractor shall inform residents and business operators at properties within 300 feet of the project
site of proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize potential
annoyance related to construction noise. Proof of mailing the notices shall be provided to the
Community Development Department before the City issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be
in place before beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related
complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
N-4(a). HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be shielded and located on building
rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest residential property line.
N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. If parking areas or loading
docks would be located within 250 feet of the residential properties to the west, a masonry noise
barrier shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed residences adjacent to the
commercial land use area on the eastern portion of the project site. The noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square
foot, and shall have no openings or gaps.
N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall implement the following
measures, or similar combination of measures, which demonstrate that interior nois e levels in
proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch Way and Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would
be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. The required interior noise
reduction shall be achieved through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques,
which may include (but are not limited to):
• In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such as air
conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be provided, if mechanical
ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise standards, as demonstrated by a qualified
acoustical consultant).
• All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50, consisting of
construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8 inch Type “X” gypsum board
on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch centers and 3 ½ inch fiberglass insulation.
Packet Pg. 198
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 19
R ______
• All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the noise reduction
provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.
• An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be provided to the City
for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that the selected windows and doors
in combination with wall assemblies would reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the
City’s interior noise standard.
• All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust, etc.) shall have
at least two 90 degree turns in the duct.
• All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner. Sliding window
panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and the window frames shall be
caulked to the wall opening around the perimeter with a non-hardening caulking compound to
prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in
the closed position.
• The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified
acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction techniques included
in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would achieve interior noise levels
that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL.
N-5(b). Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation. Outdoor activity areas (e.g.,
patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared multifamily residential recreational spaces,
hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the
City’s exterior standard of 60 dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from
traffic noise such that intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or sh all include noise barriers
capable of reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas shall
be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise barriers may be
constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or masonry material with a surface
density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. The applicant
shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustic
consultant certifying that the specific outdoor noise reduction techniques in combination with the
orientation of outdoor activity areas of shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel,
commercial, and offices would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA
CNEL.
N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such
as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern property line of residential lots that
abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity areas (patios and pools) at these residences
from sound intrusion from traffic along Froom Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall
provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring
residences from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a
higher final elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per squ are
foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall
submit a report to the Community Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant
certifying that the specific exterior noise reduction techniques included would achieve exterior
noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
Packet Pg. 199
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 20
R ______
N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel includes an outdoor activity area
(such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier, such as berms, landscaping,
or glass, must be installed along the eastern property line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101
right of way to protect these outdoor activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S.
101. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall provide, at minimum, an 8
foot high barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever use (i.e., U.S.
101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a noise barrier shall be constructed of any masonry
material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings
or gaps. If an alternative material is used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community
Development Department by a qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific
exterior noise reduction techniques included in the hotel component of the project would achieve
exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
Recreation Mitigation
REC-1. Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay parkland in-lieu fees in
accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for the parkland shortage. The project’s
specific fee shall be determined by the City at the time of project approval, after accounting for
parkland provided within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from
the project shall be directed to new projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation
facilities within the City of San Luis Obispo parks system.
Transportation Mitigation
T-1(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
• City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes (ongoing)
T-1(b). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road.
• Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to
310’ (Phase 1)
• Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road
(Phase 1)
• Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Phase
1)
• Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado Road/Dalidio Drive to Madonna
Road (Phase 1)
• Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1)
• Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1)
T-1(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2)
T-1(d). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street.
• Optimize Signal Timing
T-1(e) . Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
Packet Pg. 200
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 21
R ______
• Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on northbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos
Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Extend right turn lane on southbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los Osos Valley Road
to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos
Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
T-1(f). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way.
• Signalization (Phase 1)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-1(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2)
• Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement (Phase 1)
T-1(h). Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way.
• Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed)
T-1(i). Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway.
• Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when connection is constructed)
T-2(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps.
• Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1)
T-2(d). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(e) . Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2)
T-2(f). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
• Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to northbound Froom
Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way
to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction)
• Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to eastbound Los Osos
Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
T-2(g). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
Packet Pg. 201
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 22
R ______
• Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1)
T-2(h). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(i). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street.
• Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1)
T-2(j). Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street
• Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1)
• Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1)
T-3(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera Street)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
T-3(b). Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
T-3(c) . Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to Higuera Street)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps, Phase 2)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3)
T-3(d). Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to Higuera
Street)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado Road is
constructed/improved)
T-4. Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic management plan
shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works
Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions,
duration of construction, physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other
facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include:
• Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign informing the
public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall occur prior to beginning
work and periodically during the course of the project construction. The advertising shall
include notification of changes to bus schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations,
potential impacts during school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may
be impacted during construction.
• Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to the
greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of work
adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially closed.
• Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for
vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the school day.
Packet Pg. 202
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 23
R ______
• Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses, bicyclists,
and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools.
• Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that are
determined to be unacceptably congested due to construction traffic.
T-5. Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way bridge connection shall be
completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific Plan buildout.
T-6. Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections within the
Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design, unless the City Public Works
Department determines that roundabout control is infeasible.
T-7. Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along San Luis Ranch Road shall
include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections, and traffic -calming features, such as
diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments.
T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[e]/Mitigation
Measure T-2[f])
T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f])
T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f])
T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road
• Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’
• Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’
T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
Packet Pg. 203
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 24
R ______
• Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’
T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T-1[b])
T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street
• Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’
• Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’
T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[d]/Mitigation
Measure T-2[f])
T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[g])
T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-2[j])
T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley Road)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom Ranch Way).
Packet Pg. 204
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 25
R ______
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and southbound ramps)
Other Required Mitigation from the Initial Study
GEO-1. Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction Measures . Design
and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all subgrades shall be specifically
proportioned to resist Design Earthquake Ground Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and
SDS=0.832 and engineered to withstand Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground
acceleration (PGAM) equal to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project
(GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type, potential for
liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation methods that are available.
GEO-2. Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores included in the project,
goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the floor in any area where customers
are present, unless provisions are made to prevent the goods from falling during an earthquake of
up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the
City before approval of occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy.
GEO-3. Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications shall include the geotechnical
recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report, prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on
May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein that shall be incorporated into the final project building
plans include specification for the following components of development preparation and design:
• Building Pad Preparation
• Paved Areas Preparation
• Pavement Design
• Interlocking Concrete Pavers
• Conventional Foundations
• Post-Tensioned Slabs
• Slab-On-Grade Construction
• Retaining Walls
• Exterior Concrete Flatwork
SECTION 2. Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development
Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map Approval with Findings & Conditions. The City Council
does hereby approve application SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015, a Specific Plan, General Plan
Amendment/Pre-Zoning, and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM #3096), to
allow up to 580 dwelling units, including an 80-unit density bonus consistent with City
requirements, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions being
incorporated into the Vesting Tentative Tract Map:
Findings:
1. The project area was identified as one of three Specific Plan areas designated for
development when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements update were
Packet Pg. 205
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 26
R ______
adopted by the City Council in December 2014. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan was
prepared to implement this aspect of the General Plan.
2. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with policy direction for the area included in
the General Plan, specifically Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, which identifies the San Luis
Ranch area as a Special Focus Area (SP-2), subject to policies for the development of a
specific plan and certain broad development parameters and principles. The Specific Plan is
also consistent with all other applicable General Plan policies, as described and analyzed in
Section 6.0 of the May 24, 2017, staff report to the Planning Commission for this project,
and as discussed further within the Final EIR.
3. The General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning allows the implementation of the San Luis Ranch
Specific Plan by:
• Updating the City’s Land Use Map to reflect the development pattern included in the
Specific Plan;
• Updating the City’s Circulation Map to reflect the circulation system included in the
Specific Plan;
• Updating the relevant portions of the General Plan to update statistical data related to
land use acreage and long-term buildout potential; and
• Providing the pre-zoning information needed for LAFCo to consider annexation of the
site to the City, which is a prerequisite for allowing development on the site under the
City’s General Plan.
4. As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General
Plan because it is consistent with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, it respects existing
environmental site constraints, will add to the City’s residential housing inventory, allow for
appropriate non-residential development, and provides needed infrastructure and roa dway
improvements identified in the City’s General Plan.
5. The Specific Plan project was reviewed by various City advisory bodies, including the
Architectural Review Commission, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Parks and Recreation
Commission, and Cultural Heritage Committee, and incorporates input consistent with their
direction.
6. The Airport Land Use Commission found the Specific Plan project as proposed to be
consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan.
7. Development will occur consistent with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and the required
architectural review process, which will allow for detailed review of development plans to
assure compliance with City plans, policies, and standards.
8. As conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements for access
through (or use of property within) the proposed subdivision, and the project is consistent
with the pattern of development prescribed in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan.
Packet Pg. 206
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 27
R ______
9. The proposed project will provide affordable housing consistent with the intent of
California Government Code §65915, and in compliance with City policies and the
Housing Element.
10. The Tentative Map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures
prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act,
as implemented through the San Luis Ranch Final EIR.
Planning Commission Recommended Modifications to the Specific Plan
1. Madonna Road - Safe Pedestrian Crossing. Explore ways to improve pedestrian access
and safety related to crossing Madonna Road near Oceanaire Drive, particularly to
improve access to Laguna Lake Park.
2. Froom Ranch Way Safety. Address ways to slow vehicular speeds on Froom Ranch
Way, especially in the context of improving bike safety.
3. Net Zero Carbon Policy. Explore ways to promote a Net Zero Carbon concept in new
development, probably most effectively addressed as a Specific Plan policy that allows
some degree of flexibility.
4. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations. Modify the Specific Plan to require that
garages are “EV-ready” to allow for installation of EV charging stations, without actually
requiring the EV stations to be installed as part of development. Also consider allowing
for EV stations adjacent to apartment buildings in higher density portions of the project.
5. Zero Lot Line. Allow for the flexibility to include more zero lot line development, as a
means of creating more usable outdoor area within the small lots. Incorporate zero lot
line concept with flexibility if possible.
6. Promoting a “Sense of Place”. Consistent with Architectural Review Commission
direction, clarify graphics in the Specific Plan to better show how new development can
create a “sense of place” through the placement of buildings and nearby outdoor usable
public areas.
7. Commercial/Residential Buffer. Use text and graphics in the Specific Plan to clarify
how buffer areas between residential and commercial areas can be effectively addressed
to minimize land use conflicts.
8. Great Blue Heron Mitigation. Clarify how proposed FEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-
1(f), which addresses potential impacts to great blue heron habitat, can be effectively
implemented through the Specific Plan.
9. Tie Fees to Modal Split Goals. Clarify in the Specific Plan that transportation fees
should be tied to the attainment of modal split goals.
Other Modifications to the Specific Plan to Ensure Consistency with the Final EIR and Map
10. Add a roadway classification map that is consistent with the General Plan;
11. Add a bicycle classification map that is consistent with General Plan and Bicycle
Transportation Plan;
Packet Pg. 207
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 28
R ______
12. Expand Section 6.5 Neighborhood Traffic Management to be consistent with the
findings of the Final EIR;
13. Revise Section 6.6 Street Network & Standards such that street classifications and cross
sections are consistent with general plan policy, City standards, and the vesting tentative
map;
14. Revise Section 6.7 Summary of Supportive Interface with Adjacent Street and Path
to include all relevant connections and improvements consistent with the findings and
mitigations identified in the Final EIR;
15. Revise Section 7.4 Utilities and Streets such that discussion regarding the Dalidio/Prado
Connection and Froom Ranch Way Connection is consistent with the findings and
mitigation identified in the Final EIR;
16. Revise Sections 7.6 Performance Triggers & 7.7 Phasing Strategy into a single
comprehensive infrastructure improvements section listing all of the applicant proposed
infrastructure improvements in addition to the primary onsite infrastructure
improvements identified as mitigation in the Final EIR along with phasing and
establishment of which party is responsible for implementation;
17. Revise Section 7.8 Financing Strategy – Required Facilities to reflect the project
description evaluated in the EIR, to include all of the improvement projects and their
actual triggers as established in the EIR, to update construction estimates and impact fees,
and to be consistent with the draft development agreement;
18. Revise Section 8 Implementation to add policies requiring sequential construction of the
project consistent with the project description evaluated in the Final EIR, policies
requiring participation in an infrastructure financing program, and policies regarding the
acquisition of ROW necessary for infrastructure;
19. Eliminate Section 8.2 San Luis Ranch Approval and Adoption due to redundancy with
other policies and processes;
20. Replace Table ES-1 in Appendix B of the Specific Plan with the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program as established in the Final EIR; and
21. Update Tables 7-14 and 7-15, which address improvement projects cost allocation and
estimated project impact fees, based on the outcome of ongoing Development Agreement
negotiations between the City and applicant. The phasing and infrastructure costing
Tables in Chapter 7 of the Specific Plan shall be updated with accurate infrastructure
costs, fair share calculations, and phasing information following a detailed financial
analysis to be prepared for the Development Agreement. These tables shall be updated
prior to final approval of the Development Agreement. A specific plan amendment shall
not be required to update table information in the document.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Conditions:
Fire
1. A second point of fire department access to the multi-family portion of the development
shall be provided in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element and Fire Code
Appendix D. The second access road may be for Emergency Vehicles only, shall be at least
Packet Pg. 208
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 29
R ______
20 feet of drivable surface in width, be designed to support 73,000 lbs, and be accessible
from either side by an automatic opening gate compatible with emergency preemption
equipment. The second point of access shall be at least one half the diagonal distance of the
area served separated from the main access point in accordance with the Safety Element
and Fire Code Access Provisions or as approved by the Fire Chief. Access roads parallel to
project buildings of 3 stories in height or more shall have an unobstructed width of 26 feet.
2. The project shall provide a minimum of two points of access to the subdivision from
an existing public way wherever there are more than 30 housing units. Emergency Vehicle
Access points may be accepted in lieu of full access.
3. All streets that are less than 28 feet in width shall be posted “No Parking – Fire Lane”
on both sides. Streets less than 36 feet in width shall be posted on one side only.
4. The project shall provide water mains and city-standard fire hydrants to provide a
minimum needed fire flow of 1500 GPM for 2 hours to within 300 feet of the exterior
walls of all proposed structures. Fire hydrant spacing shall not exceed 500 feet.
Transportation
5. Unless a design exception is approved by the Public Works Director, the final map shall
conform to City adopted Engineering Standards, Engineering Specifications, Policies, and
Plans.
6. Project construction and infrastructure shall be completed in the sequential phase order as
evaluated in the San Luis Ranch Final EIR, or as agreed to between the City and Developer.
If phasing is modified amendments to the Specific Plan and EIR maybe required.
7. Prado Road Interchange. As part of, or prior to, recordation of the final map the subdivider
shall submit an irrevocable offer to dedicate to the City property necessary to construct the
Prado Road Overcrossing and Southbound U.S. 101 Ramps Improvements (“the
Improvements”), and all appurtenances to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
a. Approval of this map is contingent upon the effectiveness of an ordinance approving a
development agreement for the project providing mechanism(s) to fund construction and
maintenance of the Improvements (“Funding Mechanism”).
b. The Development Agreement required by condition 6(a) shall waive the rights of the
applicant, and any future successors in interest to the applicant in the property to oppose
establishment of one or more Funding Mechanisms described in the Development
Agreement or the imposing of any tax, assessment, fee or charge with respect to such a
Funding Mechanism. In the event that voters or property owners dissolve a Funding
Mechanism, a Homeowners Association will be obliged to fund any and all costs for
infrastructure and/or services that the Funding Mechanism would otherwise have funded.
CC&Rs establishing such a Homeowners Association shall be submitted for the
reasonable approval of the City Attorney and recorded before any building permit may
issue for the improvement of the Project.
Packet Pg. 209
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 30
R ______
c. Overcrossing and NB Ramp Improvements Fee Payment. The Funding Mechanism
identified in 7(b), shall be adopted before occupancy of Phase 2. The subdivider shall pay
its fair share mitigation fees for the Prado Rd. Overcrossing and Northbound U.S. 101
Ramps Improvements prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase 2.
d. SB Ramp Improvements Fee Payments. Fair share fees, for remainder of
Improvements, not included in the initial Interchange construction, (future South Bound
Ramps of the Prado Rd. Interchange and all appurtenances) shall be collected at the time
of issuance of each individual building permit for each phase.
8. Madonna & Dalidio/Prado Widening of the Madonna & Dalidio/Prado intersection per
Table 4.12-1 #2 of the San Luis Ranch EIR, Class I path on the South side, and ADA ramp
upgrades on all corners shall be constructed by the subdivider prior to issuance of building
permits. Deferral of the Class I path to “Future by others” as shown in the proposed vesting
tentative map is not approved, this improvement shall be required prior to issuance of
building permits for Phase 1. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall
complete the design of these improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the
necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction, all to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
a. Madonna Road Travel Lanes shall be a minimum of 11’ with a minimum 2’ median
or wider as necessary if pedestrian refuge is required adjacent to the left turn pockets.
Where ROW is limited widening should be accommodated on the park side.
b. Please refer to Engineering Development Review condition on dedications and
easements. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary interests in land to implement
this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the Developer in
writing to mitigate to the greatest extent feasible within right-of-way, dedication areas,
and easements under the control of the Subdivider and/or City. Alternative measures
shall be established with recordation of the final map.
9. Enhanced Madonna Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossings. Unless otherwise approved by the
Public Works Director; prior to issuance of building permits for phase 1 the subdivider
shall upgrade the pedestrian crossing at Madonna and Oceanaire to include curb
extensions and a pedestrian refuge island with push button signal activation. Space for
Curb extensions and refuge island should be accommodated by removing frontage street
parking.
Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director; prior to issuance of building
permits for Phase 3 the subdivider shall construct a “hawk” pedestrian signal and crossing
at the intersection of Dogwood and Madonna interconnected with the adjacent traffic
signals.
10. Dalidio/Prado & Froom a multilane roundabout shall be constructed by the subdivider
at the intersection of Dalidio/Prado & Froom Ranch Way prior to the issuance of building
Packet Pg. 210
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 31
R ______
permits. An interim single lane roundabout is permitted prior to issuance of building
permits for Phase 2. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall complete the
design of the multilane roundabout and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the necessary
off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Director. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary land interests
to implement this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the
Developer in writing to modify the alignment and design of the roundabout such that off-
site property interests are not necessary. The Final map shall reflect lot adjustments
resulting from final roundabout design.
Interim all-way stop control as shown in the proposed vesting tentative map or
signalization is not approved.
11. Los Osos Valley Road & SB 101 Ramp Extension of the LOVR & SB 101 off ramp left
turn lane to 320’ shall be constructed by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits.
The construction of this improvement shall be coordinated with CalTrans and the City.
12. Madonna Bike Path A protected bike facility along Madonna Road shall be constructed
within the existing right-of-way between El Mercado & Hwy 101 SB Ramps and between
the existing bike trail termini and the intersection of Oceanaire & Madonna prior to
issuance of building permits, unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public
Works Department Directors. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall
complete design.
a. Prior to issuance of building permits the subdivider shall upgrade the existing pathway
to Class I standards from El Mercado to its South Western Terminus, unless otherwise
deferred by the Community and Public Works Department Directors.
13. Froom Ranch Bridge The Froom Ranch – Prefumo Creek bridge shall be constructed
prior to issuance of building permits, unless otherwise deferred by the Community and
Public Works Department Directors. The cross section of the bridge shall at a minimum
include: 12’ clear class I multi-use path, two 6.5’ bicycle lanes, and two 11’ travel lanes.
14. Froom Ranch Widening Design of Froom Ranch widening to its final cross section from
its existing northern terminus to the LOVR frontage road shall be completed prior to
issuance of building permits for Phase 1 unless otherwise deferred by the Community and
Public Works Department Directors. The cross section shall at a minimum include: 12’
class I multi-use path with two 2’ shoulders, two 6.5’ bicycle lanes, two 11’ travel lanes
and a 10’ landscaped median.
15. Froom Ranch Road Froom Ranch Road shall have a design speed of no more than 35
miles per hour and include buffered bicycle lanes. Adjustments to lots as a result of the
design shall be reflected with recordation of the final map.
Packet Pg. 211
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 32
R ______
16. Froom Ranch & Los Osos Valley Intersection. The Froom Ranch and Los Osos Valley
Road intersection shall be widened per San Luis Ranch EIR table 4.12-1 prior to the
issuance of building permits unless otherwise deferred by the Community and Public
Works Department Directors. Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant shall
complete the design of this improvement and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the
necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements for construction all to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
a. Please refer to Engineering Development Review condition on dedications and
easements. If the Developer cannot acquire the necessary interests in land to implement
this mitigation measure, the Public Works Director may authorize the Developer in writing
to mitigate to the greatest extent feasible within right-of-way, dedication areas, and
easements under the control of the Subdivider and/or City. Alternative measures shall be
memorialized with recordation of the final map.
17. Prior to issuance of each individual building permit, the subdivider shall pay City wide
transportation impact fees. Crediting of fees for eligible expenses identified in the City’s
Transportation Fee Program is permitted.
18. Prior to beginning each phase, the subdivider shall pay its fair share mitigation costs
proportional to each phase for the intersection improvements as prescribed in the project
EIR (see Table 123 of Appendix L -Traffic Impact Study).
19. All access rights to Prado/Dalidio, Madonna Rd. and Froom Ranch Way shall be dedicated
to the City. All private access points along Dalidio/Prado shall be restricted to right in &
out, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director.
20. The final map shall be revised to include a standard “knuckle” design at the intersection of
San Luis Ranch Road and Haystack Place. The knuckle will include emergency access and
pedestrian and bicycle access to the proposed Ped/Bike Bridge and Phase 3.
21. Final map shall include a class I connection between Harvest Street and commercially
zoned property.
22. Final map shall include a trail connection between San Luis Ranch Road and the
commercially zoned lot either along the drainage channel or via Haystack Place and
between any two of parcels 293-296.
23. As part of final map the subdivider shall dedicate access easements for pedestrian/bicycle
connections including the Cul-De-Sacs to Froom Ranch Road, San Luis Ranch Rd. Bridge,
San Luis Ranch Rd. to the commercially zoned lot/Dalidio Road, and Lot 216 & Legacy
lane to open space and the central park.
Packet Pg. 212
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 33
R ______
24. As part of final map the subdivider shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to dedicate a 25’
access easement adjacent to the US 101 freeway frontage for maintenance purposes and
potential future trails.
25. Prior to recordation of the final map, design shall be completed for in-tract traffic calming
to the approval of the Public Works Director, per Final EIR Mitigation Measures T-6 and
T-7. The final map shall reflect lot adjustments resulting from completed traffic calming
design.
26. Parallel parking shall be prohibited on Froom Ranch Way.
27. The final map and improvement plans shall be adjusted to accommodate a channelized
right turn lane with median on the Dogwood approach to Madonna.
Engineering Development Review
Dedications and Easements
28. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
water wells, access, grading, drainage, agriculture / open space, slope banks,
construction, public and private streets/alleys, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, common
driveways, and maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be
recorded separately prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map, unless a
deferral is requested by the subdivider and granted by the City. Said easements may be
provided for in part or in total as blanket easements.
29. The final map and improvement plans shall show the extent of all on-site and known off-
site offers of dedication. Subdivision improvement plans and / or preliminary designs
may be required for any deferred improvements so that dedication limits can be
established. These improvements may include but are not limited to road construction
and widening, grading and drainage improvements, stormwater facilities, utility
easements, bridges, bike bridges, transit stops, bikeways, pedestrian paths, signalized
intersections, traffic circles, and roundabouts.
30. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement
(P.U.E.) across the frontage of each residential lot. A 10’ wide street tree easement and
15’ P.U.E. shall be provided across the frontage of each commercial or multi-family lot
unless reduced with the approval of the City and of PGE. Said easements shall be
adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
31. The subdivider shall include a separate offer of dedication for any offsite easements
located outside the tract boundary if needed for circulation, access, and/or utility
extensions. The developer shall include a separate offer of dedication for any easements
related to orderly development that could otherwise sunset with a map offer only.
32. All private improvements shall be owned and maintained by the individual property
owners, a property owner association, or the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as
Packet Pg. 213
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 34
R ______
applicable or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon the
formation of the CFD. Private improvements may include but are not limited to
streets/alleys, parking lots, sidewalks, private pedestrian/bike paths, sewer mains/laterals,
water services, drainage systems, detention basin(s), street lighting, landscape, landscape
irrigation, common areas, pocket parks, and linear park improvements.
33. All private stormwater treatment facilities shall be owned and maintained by the
Homeowners Association, Property Owner Association, property owner association,
and/or by individual property owners or by a Community Facilities District if specifically
identified upon the formation of the CFD. All stormdrain facilities shall be private
property unless the final map and subdivision improvement plans specifically designates
them as offered to the City and the City, in fact, accepts title and maintenance
responsibility for them. A separate encroachment agreement, in a form approved by the
City Attorney, shall be recorded for any private stormwater systems, piping, BMP’s, and
other components of such systems that are approved for location within the public right-
of-way.
34. A notice of requirements or other agreement acceptable to the City of San Luis Obispo
and the developer shall be recorded upon the City’s written request in conjunction with the
Final Map to clarify development restrictions, fee payments, conditions of development,
and references to any pertinent conditions of approval related to this map, off-site
requirements, and/or the interaction of this development to the future development of lots
1, 2, and the commercial lots.
35. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each residential lot with recordation of the final map
creating that lot. The vacant multi-family lots may pay park fees at map recordation based
on an assumed build-out density or may defer to the time of development. If payment is
received with the map, any balance due based on a change in density shall be paid prior
building permit issuance for each unit in excess of those for which payments were made
with the map. Deferred payment will be subject to the fees in effect at the time of re-
subdivision or building permit application unless the fee payor has a vested right to pay a
lesser amount. If residential occupancies, including any care-takers units, are proposed
with the future development of the commercial lots, park in-lieu fees will be required to
be paid prior to building permit issuance.
a. As required by Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4, the San Luis Ranch project is
required to provide 5.8 acres of developed parkland. The project is providing 2.8
acres of developed parkland on site. Therefore, funding for 3.0 acres of developed
parkland is required for the project to offset its requirement. The following table
identifies the total amount of in-lieu fees necessary for the project to meet its full
park requirements. The final fee amounts are subject to change based on the final
acreage of developed parkland constructed across all phases of the project.
Packet Pg. 214
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 35
R ______
Unit Type Parkland Cost Per
Unit1
Park Improvement
Cost Per Unit2
In-Lieu Fee Requirement
(Total * 52%3)
Single Family (200 units) $5,839 $6,585 $1,292,096
Multi-Family (380 units) $4,630 $4,899 $1,882,930
Total = $3,175,026
1. Current City of San Luis Oibpso Parkland In-Lieu Fee Amount.
2. Most recent cost estimate for park improvement costs (Orcutt Area Neighborhood Park).
3. The in-lieu fee requirement calculated as the difference between the 2.8 acre neighborhood park and the 5.8
acre policy minimum requirement for improved parkland.
36. Off-site dedication/acquisition of property for public right-of-way purposes may be
necessary to facilitate orderly development, anticipated build-out improvements,
and/or satisfaction of mitigation measures, conditions of approval, or compliance with
City Standards and policies. The subdivider shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and
diligently pursue acquisition of the necessary easement and/or right-of-way. For purposes
of this section 36, the term “reasonable efforts” shall include proof the subdivider has
made a commercially reasonable written offer to purchase the property interest at a fair
market value, in accordance with an appraisal conducted by an MAI appraiser. In the event
the subdivider is unable to acquire said rights-of-way, the City Council may consider
lending the subdivider its powers of condemnation to acquire the off-site right-of-way
dedication, including any necessary slope and drainage easements. The subdivider shall
pay all costs associated with such acquisition or condemnation proceedings including but
not limited to attorney’s fees, court costs, expert witness fees, and jury awards of any kind.
Without limiting the foregoing, the subdivider shall indemnify, defend and hold City
harmless from and against any and all such claims, liabilities, causes of action of any kind,
associated with City’s acquisition of such real property interests.
37. With respect to all off-site improvements, prior to filing of the Final Map, the subdivider
shall either:
a. Clearly demonstrate their right to construct the improvements by showing title or
interest in the property in a form acceptable to the City Engineer; or,
b. Demonstrate, in writing, that the subdivider has exhausted all reasonable efforts to
acquire interest to the subject property and request that the City assist in acquiring the
property required for the construction of such improvements and exercise its power of
eminent domain in accordance with Government Code Section 66462.5 to do so, if
necessary. Subdivider shall also enter into an agreement with the City to pay all costs
of such acquisition including, but not limited to, all costs associated with
condemnation. Said agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Engineer and
the City Attorney. If condemnation proceedings are required, the subdivider shall
submit, in a form acceptable to the City Engineer, the following documents regarding
the property to be acquired:
Packet Pg. 215
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 36
R ______
i. Property legal description and sketch stamped and signed by a Licensed Land
Surveyor or Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying in the State of
California;
ii. Preliminary title report including chain of title and litigation guarantee;
iii. Appraisal of the property by a City approved appraiser. In the course of obtaining
such appraisal, the property owner(s) must be given an opportunity to accompany
the appraiser during any inspection of the property or acknowledge in writing that
they knowingly waived the right to do so;
iv. Copies of all written correspondence with off-site property owners including
purchase summary of formal offers and counter offers to purchase at the appraised
price.
v. Prior to submittal of the aforementioned documents for City Engineer approval, the
Subdivider shall deposit with the City all or a portion of the anticipated costs, as
determined by the City Attorney, of the condemnation proceedings. The City does
not and cannot guarantee that the necessary property rights can be acquired or will,
in fact, be acquired. All necessary procedures of law would apply and would have
to be followed.
38. Transportation and Subdivision Improvements. Secondary access is required from all
portions and/or phases of the subdivision where more than 30 dwelling units are proposed.
The location and development of the proposed secondary access shall be presented to the
City for review and approval prior to the preparation of the related improvement plans or
final map approval. Any temporary or permanent emergency access location,
construction, and controls shall be in accordance with the Fire Code, City Engineering
Standards, and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and Public
Works Department.
39. Fire Department access shall be provided for each building construction phase to the
satisfaction of the Fire Chief. Phased street construction shall consider and provide
suitable Fire Department hydrant access, circulation routes, passing lanes, and turn-
around areas in accordance with current City codes and standards.
40. All public streets shall conform to City Engineering Standards and the specific plan
including curb, gutter, and sidewalk, driveway approaches, and curb ramps as approved
by the City Engineer. Where conflicts occur between the City Engineering Standards
and concepts identified in the specific plan and/or represented on the tentative map, the
City Engineer shall make the final determination of design approval and/or exceptions.
41. Final roadway alignment shall be consistent with the City Engineering Standards except
where the applicant has requested and been granted a formal exception. A request for
public street/gutter gradients of less than 1% has been approved. The applicant sh all
propose final construction details, specifications, and minimum construction
Packet Pg. 216
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 37
R ______
tolerances/testing for review and approval by the City Engineer in support of the request.
The request shall be endorsed prior to submittal of complete public improvement plans.
42. The developer shall be responsible for the placement and the maintenance of parking
limitation signage to allow for periodic sweeping of the entire public street system. Said
signage maintenance shall be specified by the City Engineer and shall inclu de, but need
not be limited to, damage, displacement, minimum reflectivity, and the reasonable change
of sweeping schedules.
43. Unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director and City Engineer,
the final street and drainage system design shall include standard center median
planting/treatments along Dalidio Drive and Froom Ranch Way. The bio-retention
facilities proposed for the medians shall be relocated to the adjoining commercial lots and
agricultural open space. Any offset for the adjoining displaced agricultural open space
lands shall be approved by the Planning Division and Natural Resources Manager.
44. Final street sections shall be approved in conjunction with the review and approval of the
final project drainage report. The final design shall consider drainage, transitions, and
accessibility.
45. Final traffic circle and roundabout geometry shall be consistent with applicable
engineering standards and design guidelines.
46. The developer shall record a Notice of Requirements with the map regarding the designed
and installed traffic calming devices and that the subdivision is not eligible for a future
Residential Parking District or Neighborhood Traffic Management program processing.
47. The improvement plans shall include a line-of-sight analysis at applicable intersections to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Fence heights and plantings in the areas
of control shall be reviewed in conjunction with the analysis. A separate recorded
agreement or Notice of Requirements for private property owner or HOA maintenance of
sight lines may be required as a condition of the City Engineer’s approval of the
improvement plans.
48. The subdivision improvement plans shall include full on-site and any off-site public and
private frontage improvements as required. The plans shall comply with the City
Engineering Standards, Bike Plan, Community Design Guidelines, Cal Trans Highway
Design Manual, and City policies.
49. Any jurisdictional permits from authorities other than the City, including but not limited
to, those from the Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and
Regional Water Quality Control Board required for any ground disturbing activities,
grading, demolitions, and/or street and road improvements shall be obtained prior to the
City’s approval of improvement plans and the Developer’s commencing work in
waterways within the jurisdiction of such regulatory agencies.
50. Access rights shall be offered for dedication to the City along Madonna Road, Dalidio
Packet Pg. 217
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 38
R ______
Drive, Prado Road, and Froom Ranch Way except at approved driveway locations.
51. The subdivider shall install public street lighting and all associated facilities including but
not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and luminaires along all public
streets, including Madonna Road per City Engineering Standards.
52. Private street lighting may be provided along the private streets/alleys/parking areas,
pocket parks, and linear parks per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in
conjunction with the final ARC approvals.
53. Street trees are required as a condition of development. Street trees shall generally
be planted at the rate of one 15-gallon street tree for each 35 lineal feet of property
frontage. Landscape plans may include grouping of trees to vary this standard to honor
site/public improvements, achieve visual variety, or to honor line-of-sight corridors
within the subdivision.
54. The public improvement plans shall provide a final analysis of the trees to be removed
and trees to be retained. The existing trees located along or across the tract boundary,
within areas of utility work, and/or within vacant lots proposed for future development
shall be specifically identified in those plans as removed or retained. The plan/map
submittals shall include a tree preservation plan and/or notice of requirements attached to
the final map. Trees not previously noted and approved for removal shall be retained
unless otherwise specifically approved for removal by the City. A tree preservation plan
shall be provided by a Certified Arborist and approved by the City for any trees to remain
or to be relocated.
55. Improvement plans for the entire subdivision, including any off-site improvements shall
be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Utilities Department,
and Fire Department prior to map recordation. Off-site improvements may include but
are not limited to roadways, sewer mains, water mains, recycled water mains, storm drain
improvements, off-site access roadways, transportation improvements, and utility system
improvements.
56. A separate demolition permit will be required from the Building Division for the removal
of any existing structures and related infrastructure. Building removals are subject to the
Building Demolition Regulations including the additional notification and timing
requirements for any structure over 50-years old.
57. The improvement plans shall clearly show all existing structures, site improvements,
utilities, water wells, septic tanks, leach fields, gas and wire services, etc. The plan shall
include any pertinent off-site water well and private waste disposal systems that are
located within regulated distances to the proposed drainage and utility improvements. The
plan shall include the proposed disposition of the improvements and any proposed phasing
of their demolition and removal.
58. The map and improvement plans shall show and clarify the extent of all existing public
and private easements. The developer shall provide any additional clarification regarding
Packet Pg. 218
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 39
R ______
the water wells shown on the proposed map and listed as City wells. The developer shall
provide any additional clarification on any outstanding private easement agreements
including but not limited to the billboard easement agreement (including the exact ingress
and egress in favor of the Grantee of the billboard easement). The im provement plans
shall clearly show and label the limits of existing and proposed improvements within the
easements.
59. If phased construction of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing plan shall
provide for the ultimate structural street section and pavement life (per the City's
Pavement Management Plan) prior to acceptance by the City Engineer. The engineer of
record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
60. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete construction phasing plan in
accordance with the mitigation measures, conditions of approval, City codes, and
standards. A truck circulation plan and construction management and staging plan shall
be included with any demolition, stockpile, grading, or improvement plan submittal.
General truck routes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City. The
engineer of record shall provide a summary of the extent of cut and fill with estimates on
the yards of import and export material. The summary shall include rough grading, utility
trench construction, road construction, AC paving, concrete delivery, and vertical
construction loading estimates on the existing public roadways. The developer shall
either: 1) complete roadway deflection testing before and after construction to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall complete repairs to the pre-construction
condition, or 2) shall pay a roadway maintenance fee in accordance with City Engineering
Standards and guidelines, or 3) shall propose a pavement repair/replacement program
satisfactory to the City Engineer. The roadway impacts analysis and mitigation strategy
shall be approved prior to commencing with grading or construction.
61. Retaining wall and/or retaining wall/fence combinations along property lines shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Division and shall conform with the zoning
regulations for allowed combined heights or shall be approved through the ARC or
separate Fence Height exception process.
62. The ARC plans and public improvement plans shall show the location of the proposed
mail receptacles or mail box units (MBU’s) to the satisfaction of the Post Master and the
City Engineer. The subdivider shall provide a mailbox unit or multiple units to serve all
dwelling units within this development as required by the Post Master. MBU’s shall not
be located within the public right-of-way or public sidewalk area unless specifically
approved by the City Engineer. Contact the Post Master at 543-2605 to establish any
recommendations regarding the number, size, location, and placement for any MBU’s to
serve the several neighborhoods and occupancies.
63. Porous concrete, pavers, or other surface treatments as approved by the City Engineer
shall be used for private parking areas, V-gutters, private curb and gutter, etc. to the extent
feasible within the over-all drainage design for water quality treatment/retention in
accordance with the specific plan and Land Use Policies.
Packet Pg. 219
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 40
R ______
64. The subdivision improvement plans shall show that accessibility to all common areas,
linear parkways, and connecting neighborhood paths/trails is achieved per the ADA and
the California Building Code to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Building Official.
Utilities
65. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and
dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of the City’s
Municipal Code. An annual Construction Water Permit is available from the City’s
Utilities Department. Recycled water is readily available near the intersection of Madonna
Road and San Luis Ranch Road, and shall be stubbed within the project site with a
temporary filling station / recycled water hydrant assembly before grading operations
begin.
66. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the development’s recycled water system shall
have: an 8-inch recycled water system along San Luis Ranch Road and Dogwood Court
from Madonna Road to Froom Ranch Way, and along Froom Ranch Way from Prefumo
Creek to Highway 101, and a 14” recycled water main shall extend easterly from the
intersection of San Luis Ranch and Madonna Road up to the northeastern corner of the
project’s frontage along Madonna Road.
67. Water flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016 Potable
Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be
the sole water purveyor for water services within the proposed development, which shall
comply with all municipal code requirements. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the
development’s water system shall have: a 12-inch water main extending easterly along
Froom Ranch Way from Oceanaire Drive up to Dalidio Drive and southerly along Dalidio
Drive up to Highway 101, and shall include a 10-inch water main along San Luis Ranch
Road from Madonna Road up to Froom Ranch Way.
68. Sewer flow rates and velocities shall comply with the requirements of the 2016
Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy. Prior to issuance of a
building permit the development’s sewer system shall have: a 24-inch sewer main
extending along the south boundary of the parcel within a new sewer easement from Lot
209 to the Laguna Lift Station, and shall include associated improvements at the lift station
to accommodate the proposed casing and sewer line. Easements and encroachment
permits from Caltrans shall be secured to cross the highway, and shall include the
installation of a new sewer casing per requirements of the encroachment permit.
69. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall
be served to each lot to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department and serving
utility companies. Fiber-optic communication shall be provided from the existing Laguna
lift station to the proposed community park along the sewer alignment. All public and
private sewer mains/laterals shall be shown on the public improvement plans and shall
be constructed per City Engineering Standards unless a waiver or alternate standard
is approved by the City. The plans shall clearly delineate and distinguish public and
Packet Pg. 220
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 41
R ______
private improvements. No sewer lift stations shall be used for the wastewater collection
system given that preliminary designs demonstrate the ability to serve the development
by a gravity sewer system.
70. All proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design
standards effective at the time of improvement plan approval, and shall have alignments
for maintenance of public infrastructure acceptable to the Public Works Department. All
public utilities shall be within the public right of way and the final alignments of all water
and sewer mains shall be approved by the Utilities Engineer.
71. All sewer and water infrastructure impacted by the proposed Highway 101 interchange
layout and associated clearances required by the Engineering Design Standards shall be
relocated to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director.
72. Final grades and alignments of all public and/or private water, recycled water, sewer and
storm drains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and
Utilities Department. The final location, configuration, and sizing of on-site service
laterals and meters shall be approved in conjunction with the review of the building plans,
fire sprinkler plans, and/or public improvement plans.
73. The limit, extent, and method of termination for all public utilities shall be approved to
the satisfaction of the City Utilities Engineer. Redundant mains or mainlines located with
limited access for maintenance may need to be redesigned prior to issuanc e of a building
permit and as directed by the Utilities Engineer. The extension of mainlines along the
subdivision boundary/frontage may be required for orderly development prior to issuance
of a building permit and as a directed by the Utilities Engineer.
74. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, the gas main shall be located in a joint
trench in accordance with PUC and utility company standards to provide additional
clearances within the pavement section of all streets to accommodate the several City
public utility mains.
75. The improvement plans shall show the location of all domestic and landscape water
meters. The plan shall include service lateral sizes and meter sizes. Sizing calculations
shall justify service and meter sizing prior to issuance of a building permit and to the
satisfaction of the Utilities Director. Water impact fees related to the irrigation water
meter(s) shall be paid prior to approval of the subdivision improvement plans for each
map and/or construction phase depicting that meter or those meters.
76. A final sewer report and supporting documentation for the design of the public sewer
main serving the future development on lots 1 & 2 shall be approved by the Utilities
Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans. The depth of the off-site
and on-site sewer mains shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director.
77. The public improvement plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed overhead
wire utilities. Any existing overhead primary and secondary wiring within the tract
Packet Pg. 221
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 42
R ______
boundary shall be undergrounded in conjunction with the subdivision improvements.
Unless otherwise specifically approved, pole relocation in lieu of undergrounding is not
permitted. Off-site service drops shall be eliminated. The new service feeds for the
subdivision shall be completed by underground wiring without a net increase in utility
poles. Terminal end utility poles shall be located off-site unless otherwise approved by
the City.
78. Any widening of streets with existing overhead wire utilities shall include the
undergrounding of the existing wiring. The City Engineer may require replacement
streetlights per City Standards where streetlights exist on wood poles.
79. The developer shall exhaust all reasonable efforts to eliminate or underground the existing
overhead wiring located along the southeast tract boundary. The elimination and/or
undergrounding shall consider existing services and/or utilization equipment to remain.
The plan to eliminate, reduce, or underground the existing services shall be approved to
the satisfaction of the City, Cal Trans, PGE, and billboard easement grantee.
Undergrounding service to any existing or proposed water well shall consider standard
farming operations and the depth of deep ripping. Any proposal for partial
undergrounding, waiver, or deferral shall be subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director. The existing PGE high voltage wires and towers and the existing
overhead wiring along Highway 101 are specifically excluded from this requirement.
80. Preliminary undergrounding plans for the entire subdivision shall be processed through
PGE and any respective wire utility companies in conjunction with public improvement
plan submittal. The preliminary PGE plans/memo shall be provided to the engineer of
record and the City for review and approval prior to commencing with the PGE final
handout package.
81. Irrigation systems using recycled water shall be designed and operated as described in the
City’s Procedures for Recycled Water Use, including the requirement that sites utilizing
recycled water require backflow protection on all potable service connections. Three sets of
irrigation plans shall be submitted for review during the City’s improvement plan and/or
building permit review process.
82. The project’s Landscape Plan shall be consistent with provisions in effect at the time of
building permit issuance for declared drought emergency conditions that may require an
Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) below 50 percent of the Maximum Applied Water
Allowance (MAWA).
Grading, Drainage & Storm Water
83. Any permit approvals required from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department
of Fish and Wildlife, or the Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be secured and
presented to the City prior to the approval of any subdivision grading and/or
improvements related to the jurisdictional area. The engineer of record shall review the
permit approvals and any specific permit conditions for compliance with the plans,
subdivision improvement designs, drainage system design/report, and soils report. The
Packet Pg. 222
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 43
R ______
engineer of record shall forward the permits to the City with a notation that the permits
have been reviewed and are in general conformance with the design of the improvements.
84. The public improvement plans submittal shall clarify how any wetlands, creek corridors,
and riparian habitat areas will be preserved to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources
Manager. Include any specific details for the proposed creek crossings in accordance with
any preservation strategies, mitigation measures, and other requirements and needed
permits from agencies with jurisdiction or permitting authority. Sensitive areas shall be
staked, fenced, or otherwise delineated and protected prior to commencing with
construction, grading, or grubbing.
85. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to eradicate and control the expansion of
any known non-native invasive plant species to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources
Manager. These plants may require treatment in advance and prior to commencing with
ground disturbing activities and grading.
86. Expansion index testing or other soils analysis may be required on a lot-by-lot basis for all
graded pads and for in-situ soils on natural lots in accordance with the current Building
Codes or otherwise as deemed necessary by the City Engineer or Building Official.
87. Final pad certifications shall include the certification of pad construction and elevations.
The soils engineer shall certify all grading prior to acceptance of the public improvements
and/or prior to building permit issuance. The certification shall indicate that the graded
pads are suitable for their intended use.
88. Cut and fill slopes shall be protected as recommended by the soils engineer. Brow ditches,
drainage collection devices, and drainage piping may be required. The public
improvement plans and final map shall reflect any additional improvements and private
easements necessary for slope protection and maintenance. Unless otherwise approved for
public maintenance by the City Engineer, brow ditches and drainage collection devices
shall be maintained by the HOA or funded by a Funding Mechanism.
89. A separate easement agreement for the existing and altered Cerro San Luis Channel shall
be approved to the satisfaction of the City. The easement agreement shall be in a format
provided by the City. The agreement shall include the maintenance responsibility by the
individual property owner(s), a property owner association, the Homeowner’s Association
(HOA) as applicable, or by a Community Facilities District if specifically identified upon
the formation of the CFD. The easement agreement shall include limitations in use within
the easement area, and provisions for City access rights for maintenance in an emergency
or if the responsible party fails to maintain.
90. The subdivision improvement plans shall include a complete grading plan to show site
accessibility in accordance with State and Federal regulations for all public and/or private
roads, transit stops, trails, paths, walks, bikeways, parks, and bridges where applicable.
The submittal shall provide additional analysis if site accessibility will not be provided and
for any feature or element where accessibility is purportedly not required. The
accessibility regulations or guidelines in effect at the time of subdivision improvement
Packet Pg. 223
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 44
R ______
construction will be applied.
91. The subdivision improvement plans, grading plans, drainage plans, and drainage reports
shall show and note compliance with City Codes, Standards and Ordinances, Floodplain
Management Regulations, specific plan stormwater provisions, Waterways Management
Plan Drainage Design Manual, and the Post Construction Stormwater Regulations as
promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, whichever pertinent sections
are more restrictive.
92. The improvement plan submittal shall include a complete grading, drainage, and erosion
control plan. The proposed grading, drainage plan, and reports shall consider the proposed
construction phasing. Historic off-site and upslope watersheds tributary to the area of
phased construction shall be considered. Run-on from adjoining developed or
undeveloped parcels shall be considered.
93. The project plan and reports shall show compliance with the City’s Floodplain
Management Regulations and FEMA requirements. This project is located within an
unstudied A zone and adjacent to an AE zone. The required Conditional Letter of Map
Revisions Based on Fill (CLOMR-F) shall be processed and approved by FEMA prior to
commencement of construction or placement of fill within the Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA). The final LOMR-F shall be submitted to FEMA, along with the required
Community Acknowledgement form, within 6 months of the completion of the grading.
The LOMR-F shall be approved by FEMA prior to acceptance of the final building pad
and development grades by the City of San Luis Obispo and prior to building permit
issuance.
94. The revised 100-year flood limits shall be shown and noted on the improvement plans and
an additional final map sheet for reference. The drainage report and final plans shall clarify
the 100-year flood elevations, clearances, and freeboard at all new vehicle bridge,
pedestrian bridge, and pipe bridge crossings of the creek corridors.
95. The improvement plans shall clarify the extent of improvements at each respective well
site related to the proposed grading, top soil removal, grade lowering, etc. The plan shall
include any alterations to well head and appurtenant electrical service, pum ps, and panel
boards. The plans shall show and note compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management
Regulations, adopted Building Code/Electrical Code, and Department of Water Resources
requirements for protection of the service equipment and the well/groundwater.
96. The engineer of record shall provide a digital copy of the final Hydrologic Engineering
Center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) modeling to the City in accordance with
Section 4.0 of the Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual.
97. The final drainage report, Post Construction Stormwater Regulation compliance strategy,
and plans shall include final details related to the Cerro Channel diversion structure. The
plan, report, and jurisdictional permits shall consider the limits of any necessary silt
removal and construction of the diversion. The applicant shall evaluate the need for any
additional upstream silt/trash removal and/or the elimination of illicit discharges from off-
Packet Pg. 224
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 45
R ______
site properties. The final reports and O & M Manual shall consider any need for on-going
maintenance. The plan shall include reasonable provisions for the capture of silt, trash,
and debris through pre-basins or other methods to minimize the impacts to the detention
basin.
98. The final stormwater reports, plan, and program shall include consideration of solid
waste/trash and floating trash removal from the stormdrain system and BMP’s prior to
discharge to the adjoining creeks and/or waterways. The strategy shall consider any City
or State regulations or guidelines regarding trash removal available at the time of public
improvement plan development and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
99. The developer shall prepare an Operations and Maintenance Manual for review and
approval by the City in conjunction with the development of any stormwater BMP’s that
will be maintained by the Homeowners Association, Property Owner Association, or by
private property owners. A Private Stormwater Conveyance Agreement shall be recorded
in a format provided by the City prior to final inspection approvals and acceptance of
subdivision improvements.
100. The subdivider/developer shall provide notification to private property owners regarding
any individual maintenance responsibility of any parkway or backyard stormwater BMP’s
in accordance with Section E.2 of the RQWCB Resolution R3-2013-0032. The
notification may be by Notice of Requirements or other method acceptable to the City.
101. The stormwater improvements other than City Standard public storm drain infrastructure
shall be maintained by the individual property owner(s), a property owner association, the
Homeowner’s Association (HOA) as applicable, or by a Community Facilities District if
specifically identified upon the formation of the CFD. A separate encroachment/hold
harmless agreement may be required in conjunction with certain private improvements
proposed for location within the public rights-of-way.
102. The final details for any proposed bio-retention facilities or other stormwater BMP’s
located within the public right-of-way shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. The project soils engineer shall review and provide recommendations on any
proposed site-constructed and/or proprietary retention systems. Analysis of impacts to the
public improvements, protection of utilities, and methods to minimize piping and
protection of private properties shall be addressed in the final analysis.
103. The proposed detention basins and any pre-basin shall be designed in accordance with the
Waterways Management Plan Drainage Design Manual. The proposed surface runoff and
drainage from the detention basin(s) shall include a non-erosive outlet to an approved point
of disposal. The outlet(s) design and location should replicate the historic drainage where
feasible. Any off-site detention basin, temporary basin, or other drainage improvements
shall be subject to approval by the City. Any required or proposed off-site grading or
drainage improvements shall be completed within recorded easements or under an
appropriate license or other private agreement.
Packet Pg. 225
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 46
R ______
104. The required CC&R’s shall entitle the owners of lots 1, 2, the commercial lots, and any
parcels resulting from the further subdivision of those parcels to annex to the HOA to allow
a common stormwater management strategy for the subdivision, at the option of those
owners. The subsequent development/re-subdivisions may, at the sole discretion of those
developers or subdividers, annex to the HOA, or demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City
how they will provide storm drainage mitigation through their own development strategy
and/or subdivision design and HOA. The HOA shall provide for maintenance of all private
common area drainage channels, on-site and/or sub-regional drainage basins, water quality
treatment and conveyance improvements. The CC&R's shall be approved by the City and
shall be recorded prior to or concurrently with recordation of the Final Map. A Notice of
Annexation or other appropriate mechanism to annex other subdivisions into the HOA,
including but not limited to any shared regional detention basin, shall be recorded
concurrently with the map.
105. Any existing areas of swale, creek and/or channel erosion shall be stabilized to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, Natural Resources Manager, and other permitting
agencies. The existing channel shall be cleared of any illegal dumping, construction
debris, or other deleterious material to the satisfaction of the City Natural Resources
Manager.
106. The project soils engineer shall review the final grading and drainage plans and Low
Impact Development (LID) improvements. The soils report shall include specific
recommendations related to public improvements, site development, utility, and building
pad/foundation construction related to the proposed LID improvements. The project soils
engineering report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the Subdivision
Regulations and City Engineering Standards.
107. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required in accordance with State
and local regulations. A hard copy of the SWPPP shall be provided to the City in
conjunction with the Public Improvement Plan submittal and subsequent building plan
submittals. The Water Discharge Identification (WDID) number shall be included by
reference on all construction plans sets. An erosion control plan shall be included with the
improvement plans and all building plan submittals for demolitions, grading, and new
construction.
108. The project development and grading shall comply with all air quality standards and
mitigation measures. The developer shall provide written notification from the County Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) regarding compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations including but not limited to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations related to Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) to
the City prior to plan approval, permits, and commencing with development grading.
Planning Requirements
109. At the time of submittal of a request for approval of a final map, the subdivider shall
provide a written report detailing the methods and techniques employed for complying
with these conditions of approval and the mitigation measures imposed upon certification
Packet Pg. 226
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 47
R ______
of the EIR for the Project.
110. Agricultural Heritage Facility and Learning Center: Prior to issuance of building permits
for Phase 3, the proposed relocation and rehabilitation/reconstruction of buildings at the
Agricultural Heritage Facility and Learning Center shall be completed in conformance
with Mitigation Measure CR-1(a). Prior to grading or commencement of any construction
activities for infrastructure or building construction, a security and protection plan shall be
submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The
plan shall detail methods to prevent trespassing and prevent removal of any building
materials. The plan shall continue to remain in active implementation through Phases 1 &
2, and prior to the relocation action.
111. All owners, potential purchasers, occupants (whether as owners or renters), and potential
occupants (whether as owners or renters) shall receive full and accurate disclosure
concerning the noise, safety, or overflight impacts associated with airport operations prior
to entering any contractual obligation to purchase, lease, rent, or otherwise occupy any
property or properties within the airport area consistent with Section 2.6.7 of the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan.
112. Prior to final map, County of San Luis Obispo Avigation easements shall be recorded for
each parcel within the development.
113. Prior to the recording of any phase of the final map, the applicant shall enter into and record
an Affordable Housing Agreement with the City, detailing the timing of construction of
affordable units on-site, and with guarantees to ensure timely delivery of all of the required
affordable housing units. The Affordable Housing Agreement must be included as an
exhibit to the Development Agreement, and include appropriate guarantees to ensure the
timely delivery of affordable housing units, dedication of real property, or payment of in -
lieu fees, consistent with Section 5.2.2 of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan.
114. Pursuant to Government Code §66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and
hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside,
void or annul, the approval by the City of this map and its related approvals, and all actions
relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. The City shall promptly
notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the
defense. If the city fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or
proceeding, or to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not thereafter be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold the City harmless.
115. This map is conditioned upon the annexation of the property to the city and this approval
shall not be effective until annexation of the property to the city has been completed. If the
annexation is not completed within one year of the date the City Council approves the map
or following any agreed extension in writing, then the approval of the map shall be null
and void. Consequently, no final or parcel map may be filed until the Project site is annexed
to the city.
Packet Pg. 227
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 48
R ______
Natural Resources
116. Subdivider shall submit a plan for the interim stockpiling and salvage of topsoils from the
protected agriculture land to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager and
Community Development Director. The stockpiling / top soil salvage plan shall depict
depths of excavation, temporary storage locations for salvaged top soil, and phasing of
stockpiles so that no salvaged top soil stockpiles will be in place for a period greater than
seven (7) days at a time before being replaced back in the field in order to protect soil
health and viability for future farming operations. A pre-construction meeting shall be
required prior to any grading or top soil salvage activity, and post-top soil replacement and
finished slope and drainage aspect shall be confirmed by a surveyor using laser leveling or
similar techniques.
117. A comprehensive Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be submitted to
the satisfaction of or approval by the Natural Resources Manager that provides detailed
strategies for the restoration of riparian impacts to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis
Channel to mitigate impacts associated with bridge structures and the stormwater outfall
locations, as well as for the restoration and protection strategy for the areas identified in
the Specific Plan for monarch butterfly habitat and the heron rookery. The HMMP shall
identify baseline conditions, restoration techniques, monitoring protocols, success
standards, and contingency measures and identify the responsible parties and funding
sources for implementing the plan.
SECTION 3. Term Sheet. The City Council does hereby approve the Term Sheet to
form the basis for the Development Agreement, which represents the tentative agreement between
the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and orderly development of the
property.
Findings:
1. A Development Agreement, which is authorized by statute pursuant to Government Code
section 65864 – 65869.5, is a contract between a developer and a city (or county) in which the
city provides the developer with vested development rights for a defined period of years in
exchange for the developer providing “extraordinary” public or “community” benefits that
exceed what would otherwise be permissible by law, i.e. the land use regulation “police powers”
delegated to local government by the State of California;
2. The Term Sheet forms the basis for the Development Agreement, which represents the tentative
agreement between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the phased and
orderly development of the property.
3. The Development Agreement works in parallel to other entitlements, and in the case of San
Luis Ranch, the proposed conditions of approval require its approval with a detailed
infrastructure financing plan before certain portions of the entitlement can take effect.
4. The Development Agreement would not change the development parameters included in the
Specific Plan, but would fine-tune their implementation, building on the Conditions of Approval
Packet Pg. 228
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 49
R ______
associated with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
SECTION 4. Annexation. The City Council does initiate the process of annexing the
project site into the City of San Luis Obispo, by authorizing staff to make application for annexation
to the San Luis Obispo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).
Findings:
1. The project area was identified as one of three Specific Plan areas designated for development
when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements update were adopted by the City
Council in December 2014. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan was prepared to implement this
aspect of the General Plan.
2. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan are is within the City’s Sphere of Influence as defined by
LAFCo, which is an area designated for eventual annexation provided that City services can be
provided, and that that annexation is otherwise consistent with LAFCo policies;
3. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan as conditionally approved, provides a framework for
providing the necessary City services.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2017.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of
San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
Packet Pg. 229
14
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 50
R ______
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 230
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
1
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo considers and relies on the Final Environmental
Impact Report (EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2015101083) for the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan in determining to carry out the project. The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, responses to
comments on the Draft EIR, a list of persons and agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and technical appendices. The City Council has
received, reviewed, considered, and relied on the information contained in the Final EIR, as well
as information provided at hearings and submissions of testimony from official participating
agencies, the public, and other agencies and organizations.
Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and
Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to adopt findings for each
significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the
lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091(b) requires that the City’s findings be
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the Lead Agency’s record consists
of the following, which are located at the City Community Development Department office, San
Luis Obispo, California:
• Documentary and oral evidence, testimony and staff comments and responses received and
reviewed by the Lead Agency during public review and the public hearings on the San Luis Ranch
Project.
• The City of San Luis Obispo San Luis Ranch Project Final Environmental Impact Report (May
2017).
In addition to making a finding for each significant impact, if the lead agency approves a project
without mitigating all of the significant impacts, it must prepare a statement of overriding
considerations, in which it balances the benefits of the project against the unavoidable
environmental risks. The statement of overriding considerations must explain the social,
economic, or other reasons for approving the project despite its environmental impacts (14 CCR
15093, Pub. Res. Code 21081).
This document contains the findings and statement of overriding considerations for the approval
of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and reflects the City’s independent judgment. This document
Packet Pg. 231
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
2
incorporates by reference the Final EIR. The EIR, specific plan, and other portions of the
administrative record are available for review at:
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact: Doug Davidson
(805) 781-7177
Having received, reviewed and considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all
information in the record, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby makes these
Findings pursuant to, and in accordance with, Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code.
SECTION 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As required by the City General Plan, the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is intended to contain
policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate development of land, protection of open
space, and provision of adequate public facilities. The Specific Plan is more detailed than the
General Plan but less precise than subdivision maps or construction plans. The overall objective
of the project is to adopt a specific plan for the San Luis Ranch project site, pursuant to the City
General Plan. The City’s objectives for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan include:
1. Provide infill growth for the City that is anticipated and desired by City planning decisions and
guidelines;
2. Preserve agricultural land and open space on site, maintain agricultural views from U.S. 101;
3. Create significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City that is specifically
“affordable by design;”
4. Implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design that is integrated with public transit access
and open space amenities that encourage alternative modes of transportation;
5. Create new commercial, office and hotel opportunities that will accommodate and complement
existing businesses in downtown San Luis Obispo;
6. Develop an Agriculture Heritage Facilities & Learning Center offering seasonal attractions and
local goods that promote the region’s agricultural richness;
7. Establish an important link in the Bob Jones Regional Trail;
8. Provide fair-share financial contribution towards important public circulation improvements.
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
The San Luis Ranch Project consists of a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning,
and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a 131-acre project site, including
annexation of the site into the City of San Luis Obispo. The project would also address a
Development Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding, which provides a mechanism for
project implementation. The project is intended to be consistent with the development parameters
Packet Pg. 232
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
3
described in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted in December 2014). The
project includes construction of up to 580 residential units, 150,000 square feet of commercial
development, 100,000 square feet of office development, and a 200-room hotel, with a portion of
the site preserved for agriculture and open space uses.
The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is proposed to be constructed in six phases. Phases 1, 2, and 3
would consist of residential build out, with construction planned to begin in 2017 and anticipated
to be completed by 2020. Phases 4, 5, and 6 would consist of non-residential build out, with
construction planned to begin in 2017 and anticipated to be completed by 2023. In addition to the
land use components of the project, the project phasing plan indicates that the Froom Ranch Way
extension and infrastructural improvements along Madonna Road would be constructed
concurrent with Phases 1 and 2. Infrastructure improvements along Prado Road/Dalidio Drive,
traffic signal improvements, and the Froom Ranch Way Bridge are proposed to be constructed
beginning during Phase 3. The proposed phasing plan is shown in Figure 2-14 (Project Phasing
Plan) of the Final EIR.
These project elements are further described in the EIR, specifically Section 2.5, Project
Characteristics. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is included in the EIR as Appendix B, and is
available at the following link: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-
directory/community-development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/san-luis-ranch
SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
A. BACKGROUND
The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines. In accordance
with Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of this Final EIR is to serve as an
informational document for the public and City of San Luis Obispo decision makers. Although
the project is a specific plan and development plan, The Final EIR contains a project-level
environmental review that fulfills the requirement of a project-level EIR. As defined in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15161, a project-level EIR:
…examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should
focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project.
The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182, “where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a
specific plan after January 1, 1980, no EIR or negative declaration need be prepared for a
residential project undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific plan if the project,”
as long as the residential project is within the scope of the EIR, no new environmental effects are
anticipated to occur, and no new mitigation measures are required for the residential project.
In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Draft EIR was circulated for a
52-day public review period that began December 9, 2016 and concluded on January 31, 2017. The
original 45-day comment period was scheduled to end on January 23, 2017, but was extended one
calendar week. The City held a public Planning Commission hearing on January 11, 2017, which
Packet Pg. 233
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
4
was continued on January 25, 2017, to receive public testimony in the form of verbal comments
on the Draft EIR. The City held a Cultural Heritage Committee hearing for the project on January
23, 2017 to receive public testimony in the form of verbal comments on the Draft EIR.
In addition, Section 5.0, Other CEQA-Related Discussions, of the Draft EIR was recirculated for a
45-day public review period that began March 3, 2017 and concluded on April 17, 2017. This
section of the Draft EIR was revised to include an updated discussion of energy use and
conservation related to the project. This recirculation also included the relevant portions of
Appendix D as originally contained in the Draft EIR. It should be noted that as a result of this
new discussion, no new significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified. Pursuant to
Section 15088.5(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, if the revisions subject to recirculation are
limited to a few portions of the Draft EIR, the lead agency need only recirculate the portions that
have been modified.
Responses to each written and verbal comment that the City received are included in the
Responses to Comments section of the Final EIR. The Draft EIR and Responses to Comments
collectively comprise the Final EIR for the project.
B. IMPACT ANALYSIS
Three categories of impacts are identified in the Environmental Impact Report:
Class I Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in
Class I impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings
of overriding consideration that “specific legal, technological, economic, social, or
other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives
identified in the EIR.”
Class II Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by
measures identified in the Final EIR. When approving a project with Class II
impacts, the decision makers must make findings that changes or alternatives to
the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than significant
level.
Class III Class III impacts are adverse but not significant.
C. CLARIFICATIONS TO FINAL EIR MITIGATION MEASURES
Based on feedback from the Planning Commission as well as City staff, including the City
Attorney, during the preparation of Conditions of Approval for the project, the City of San Luis
Obispo has revised certain Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR to clarify timing and
implementation for required mitigation actions. These changes are discussed in this section, and
are reflected in the Mitigation Measures detailed in Sections 5 and 6, below. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15088.5, these clarifications do not constitute a change to the project or the
substance of any required mitigation, nor do they present significant new information that would
Packet Pg. 234
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
5
require recirculation of the Final EIR, as they do not deprive the public of a meaningful
opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a
feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the
project’s proponents have declined to implement.
The Mitigation Measures that have been modified, including a brief description of these
modifications, are shown here. Changes in the Final EIR Mitigation Measure text are signified by
strikeouts (strikeouts) where text is removed and by underline font (underline font) where text is
added.
• Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation has been revised to clarify the
intended meaning of “comparable agricultural quality,” to indicate City staff preferential
order for mitigation options, and to specify the requirement for endowment under all
mitigation options to ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural
land, as shown:
Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading
permits, the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important
Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland)
on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project
development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity (e.g., Prime-
for-Prime) shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to
this measure shall be of soil quality, size, location and configuration appropriate to
maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1
ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction
proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in
this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through one or more of
the following options (listed in order of preference):
1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other farmland
conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity, which has been approved
by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of
permanently preserving agricultural land. The required easement(s) area or deed
restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland. The land
covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located
within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review
and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or
2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the
City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be applied toward the
future sufficient to fund the purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in
San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to
ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of
the payment amount and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or
a licensed appraiser; or
3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the
City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future
Packet Pg. 235
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
6
perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation
mechanism to preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo
County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure
permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the
payment and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed
appraiser; or
4) Any combination of the above mitigation options.
Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the project, the applicant shall provide
evidence of the recorded easement(s), deed restriction(s), or evidence of payment to the
City Planning Department or qualifying entity, for approval by the City’s Natural
Resource Manager to demonstrate compliance with this measure.
• Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping has been revised to use clearer
terminology, as shown:
Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust,
and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall
ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windrow windbreak hedgerow
of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient
density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations.
• Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting has been revised to focus on the
office component of the project, as retail and hotel components typically involve service
employees that would not be able to telecommute, as shown:
Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or
developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to
encourage employers within the proposed commercial, office, and hotel components of
the project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing
capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to attend
meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area.
• Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact
Avoidance and Minimization has been revised to address a clerical error, as shown:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact
Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are
implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and two-
striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore, implementation of
the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable and appropriate for two-
striped garter snake):
• A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours prior
to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as potential
western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals are likely to be
Packet Pg. 236
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
7
injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be allowed sufficient
time to move them from the project site before work activities begin. The biologist(s)
must relocate the any western pond turtle the shortest distance possible to a location
that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected by activities associated
with the project.
• Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum area
necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to western pond
turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction staging areas outside
of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent practicable.
• Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance
and Minimization has been revised to clarify implementation of construction mitigation
actions, to specify review and approval of the required habitat enhancement plan by the
City’s Natural Resource Manager, and to subordinate the potential for creating new off-
site nesting habitat as one potential mitigation action to be described in the habitat
enhancement plan, as shown:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance
and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to
avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and nesting
great blue herons.
• Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees near or
within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests identified in
the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and 2016 San Luis
Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening
Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not
be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering season from October 1
through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests
are active from February 1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted
during these time periods in areas where overwintering or nests may be present, a
qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great
blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate
clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be
conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located, no
construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the overwintering
grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines that no more
monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer active.
• A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to be
reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to issuance of
grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting habitat that is to be
preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but shall include not be limited
to:
o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress
(Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch
butterfly overwintering.
Packet Pg. 237
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
8
o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species. Native
trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy or act as
windbreaks.
o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal of
onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery may
be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons can
resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It should be
noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is experimental and
that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to
relocate black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an
agreement with the City will be required prior to implementation of the offsite
strategy on their property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include:
a. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the rookery,
where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of breeding adults,
egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time, audio recordings of
adults and juveniles shall be made.
b. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a certified
arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine the mature trees
onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources Manager to determine
whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature trees containing nests across
Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake Open Space.
c. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult arrival in
previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new location via decoys
and playback of vocalizations. The new location will be monitored regularly
by a qualified biologist for the following three breeding seasons.
• Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan has been revised to clarify
the intended definition of “unacceptably congested,” as shown:
Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a
traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San
Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on
the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints,
nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian, driveway
access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include:
• Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign
informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall
occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project
construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus schedules
and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during school drop-off
and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted during construction.
• Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained to
the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance notice of
work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be potentially
closed.
Packet Pg. 238
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
9
• Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained for
vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of the
school day.
• Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses,
bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools.
• Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections that
are determined to be unacceptably congested based on the City’s most recently
adopted traffic impact thresholds due to construction traffic.
• Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control has been revised to
clarify the intended definition of “infeasible” in the context of the required mitigation
action, as shown:
Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway
intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design,
unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is
physically infeasible.
It is the finding of the City Council that based on modifications to the Final EIR Mitigation
Measures as described above, impacts resulting from implementation of the San Luis Ranch
Project would not otherwise result in a change in the levels of impact identified in the existing
analysis contained in the Final EIR. As such, the modified mitigation measures may be used to
fulfill the environmental review requirements for the current project, and the information
contained herein does not require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The findings below are for Class III impacts. Class III impacts are adverse but not significant.
The City Council has concluded that the following effects are effects are adverse but not
significant.
A. AESTHETICS
1. Impact AES-1: Although there are potentially adverse impacts to scenic viewsheds, the
project would implement the open space and agricultural preservation and design elements
included in the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore, potential impacts to scenic vistas and scenic
resources within a state scenic highway would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.1-11
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
Packet Pg. 239
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
10
2. Impact AES-2: The project would alter the existing visual character of the site by converting
over half of the agricultural site into a predominantly residential and commercial use site.
Due to the project’s visual compatibility with surrounding development, preservation of on-
site open space and agricultural land, and compliance with design guidelines, the project’s
impact on the visual character and quality of the site would be less than significant. (Refer to
page 4.1-13 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
3. Impact AES-3: The project would introduce a new source of nighttime lighting and daytime
glare, which could increase ambient light and affect the quality of the nighttime sky.
However, project compliance with existing City requirements and design guidelines would
limit the magnitude of these effects. (Refer to page 4.1-15 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
4. Cumulative Aesthetics Impacts: As determined in the LUCE Update EIR, all development
that adheres to applicable General Plan policies would result in less than significant aesthetic
impacts. Therefore, the overall aesthetic impact of cumulative development in the project
vicinity would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.1-16 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact AG-2: The project would alter the existing land use and zoning on the project site.
However, these alterations would be consistent with the General Plan’s identification of the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan for a mix of urban, agricultural, and open space use. (Refer to
page 4.2-19 of the Final EIR.)
c. Mitigation: None
d. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Impact AG-4: Re-grading of the project site would not result in significant degradation of
viability of on-site agricultural land. On-site farmland would remain viable with removal of
topsoil, on-site soils will retain prime agricultural soils status, and stormwater will drain from
the site on the same slope and aspect as the current condition following project
implementation. (Refer to page 4.2-23 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg. 240
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
11
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
3. Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts: Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the
project would implement Land Use Element Policies 1.8.1 and 1.9.2, and Conservation and
Open Space Element Policy 8.6.3. (Refer to page 4.2-24 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
C. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-4: The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. There are no major industrial uses near the project site, and the project does
not include any industrial uses, and new residences on the project site would be located over
500 feet from U.S. Highway 101, consistent with ARB guidance for siting sensitive receptors.
(Refer to page 4.3-29 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
D. GREENOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1. Impact GHG-1: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Climate Action
Plan, which serves as a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy consistent with State CEQA
Guidelines. The GHG-reducing policy provisions contained in the Climate Action Plan were
prepared with the purpose of complying with the requirements of AB 32 and achieving the
goals of the AB 32 Scoping Plan. As a result, the Climate Action Plan is consistent with
statewide efforts established in ARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan to reduce statewide GHG
emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. (Refer to page 4.6-16 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
E. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-1: Small quantities of hazardous materials may be used in conjunction with the
proposed residential and commercial retail uses on site. However, these materials would be
limited in type and quantity such that they would not create a hazard to the public or
environment. (Refer to page 4.7-18 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg. 241
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
12
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Impact HAZ-2: The project site is adjacent to U.S. Highway 101, on which accidents that
involve hazardous materials could occur. Such accidents could potentially create a significant
hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However,
compliance with applicable regulations related to the handling and storage of hazardous
materials would minimize the risk of the public’s potential exposure to these substances.
(Refer to page 4.7-19 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
3. Impact HAZ-3: Two schools are located within one-quarter mile of the project site.
Compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that hazardous
materials impacts to schools would remain less than significant. (Refer to page 4.7-20 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
4. Impact HAZ-7: Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LBP) may be
present in existing on-site structures. Demolition of these structures would be required to
comply with applicable State and local policies and regulations for the control and
remediation of hazardous materials to prevent human exposure. (Refer to page 4.7-27 of the
Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
5. Impact HAZ-8: The project site is located within a San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport
area of influence. The project would be consistent with the CALUPH Airport Safety Zones,
which represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or
working in these areas. (Refer to page 4.7-27 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
6. Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts: As described in the LUCE Update
EIR, adherence to applicable General Plan policies and applicable State and federal regulatory
requirements would reduce any cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts
Packet Pg. 242
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
13
resulting from buildout of the City under the General Plan, including buildout of the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan, to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-30 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
F. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Impact HWQ-2: The project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, which
could result in flooding, erosion, or siltation onsite and offsite. However, the proposed
retention and detention systems, along with compliance with applicable regulations, would
ensure that this impact would remain less than significant. (Refer to page 4.8-25 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Cumulative Water Quality Impacts: The project, in conjunction with pending cumulative
development would not significantly increase the concentration of urban pollutants such as
oil, grease, and vehicular heavy metals in surface runoff. Polluted runoff which may be
generated during construction activities of cumulative development and projects considered
in this analysis would be regulated by the SWRCB under General Construction, NPDES
permits, and would be minimized through the implementation of standard construction
BMPs. (Refer to page 4.8-33 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
3. Cumulative Flooding Impacts: The proposed on-site drainage system would adequately
capture associated runoff, and the project would not substantially contribute to flooding on-
or off-site. The project grading plan has been designed such that the resulting post-
development floodplain would exclude areas proposed for housing. (Refer to page 4.8-33 of
the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
Packet Pg. 243
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
14
G. LAND USE
1. Impact LU-3: The Specific Plan would be consistent with the land use strategy in SLOCOG’s
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. (Refer to page 4.9-44
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Impact LU-4: The Specific Plan would allow residential and non-residential land uses
consistent with density and use restrictions in the City’s Airport Safety Zones, which
represent the extent of Airport-related safety hazard zones for people residing or working in
these areas. The LUCE Update EIR provided substantial evidence that the development of the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area under the updated General Plan land use designations
would be consistent with ALUP safety and noise standards. The project would not conflict
with land use policies intended to prevent airport-related safety hazards. (Refer to page 4.9-
45 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
H. NOISE
1. Impact N-2: Short-term construction activities would generate intermittent levels of
groundborne vibration. However, the expected vibration level during construction of the
project would not be perceptible at the nearest residential receptors. (Refer to page 4.10-19 of
the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Impact N-3: Project-generated traffic would incrementally increase traffic-related noise on
study area roadway segments, except on Madonna Road near the project site, which would
potentially affect existing noise-sensitive receptors along local roadways. However, the
increase in traffic noise levels along area roadways would not exceed 3 dBA, which is the
increase threshold typically audible to the human ear. (Refer to page 4.10-20 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
3. Cumulative Noise Impacts: Traffic noise levels along roadways in the project vicinity would
not increase by more than 0.5 dBA due to cumulative traffic. This increase would not be
Packet Pg. 244
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
15
significant based on the applicable traffic noise increase threshold of 3 dBA. (Refer to page
4.10-37 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: None
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
I. WATER RESOURCES
1. Impact WR-1: The project would increase water demand as a result of new residential and
commercial development on the project site. However, the Specific Plan includes water
conservation measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with new
development, and the project’s water demand would be within the City of San Luis Obispo’s
projected primary water supply. (Refer to page 4.13-10 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage
on-site water consumption associated with development Specific Plan Development. No
mitigation is required.
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
2. Cumulative Water Resources Impacts: The Specific Plan includes water conservation
measures intended to manage on-site water consumption associated with new development,
and project’s water demand would not exceed supply when combined with all possible future
development within the City. In addition, the project would reduce the overall demand on
the San Luis Obispo groundwater basin as a result of reduced on-site agricultural uses and,
therefore, would not exacerbate potential cumulative impacts on the local groundwater basin
associated with future development within the City. (Refer to page 4.13-14 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes water conservation measures intended to manage
on-site water consumption associated with development Specific Plan Development. No
mitigation is required.
b. Finding: The City finds that the impact is adverse, but less than significant.
Packet Pg. 245
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
16
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT THAT HAVE BEEN
MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
Class II impacts are significant but can be mitigated to a level of insignificance by measures identified in
the EIR. When approving a project with Class II impacts, the decision-makers must make findings that
changes or alterations to the project have been incorporated that reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level.
This section presents the project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation
measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR])
and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each
significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the
lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.
This section identifies impacts that can be fully avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level
through the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, as identified in the
Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section are considered in the same sequence in which
they appear in the EIR.
A. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact AG-1: The project would result in the direct conversion of 56 acres of Prime Farmland,
as mapped by the FMMP, to non-agricultural uses. With implementation of Mitigation
Measure AG-1, Agricultural Conservation, this impact would be reduced to a less than
significant level. (Refer to page 4.2-15 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 2 establishes a goal to provide a community that maintains
and promotes the land’s agricultural heritage. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 2.4,
which requires strict monitoring of the conversion of active agriculture to non-agricultural
uses and consideration of the possible effects of new development on character of the
community as a whole, is intended to help achieve Specific Plan Goal 2. The project also
includes a commitment, to be included in the Development Agreement, to procure an off-
site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction to comply with the Land Use
Element Policy 8.1.4.f. In addition to these Specific Plan and project components, the
Packet Pg. 246
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
17
following mitigation measures would be required to ensure that impacts associated with
the conversion of Prime Farmland are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible
— Mitigation Measure AG-1 Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading
permits, the project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important
Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique
Farmland) on the site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result
of project development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity
(e.g., Prime-for-Prime) shall be preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to
agriculture pursuant to this measure shall be of size, location and configuration
appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. The acreage
required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the off-site agricultural conservation
easement/deed restriction proposed by the project applicant, as long as this land
meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said mitigation shall be satisfied by the
applicant through one or more of the following options (listed in order of preference):
5) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or other
farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity, which has
been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, for
the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural land. The required
easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore total a minimum of 56 acres
of Prime Farmland. The land covered by said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or
deed restriction(s) shall be located within or contiguous to the City’s Urban
Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject to review and approval of the City’s Natural
Resources Manager; or
6) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the
City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, sufficient to fund the
purchase of a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County,
together with an endowment amount as may be required to ensure permanent
preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount of the payment
and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed
appraiser; or
7) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity, which has been approved by the
City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied toward a future
perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other farmland conservation
mechanism to preserve a minimum of 56 acres of Prime Farmland in San Luis
Obispo County, together with an endowment amount as may be required to
ensure permanent preservation and maintenance of agricultural land. The amount
of the payment and endowment shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a
licensed appraiser; or
8) Any combination of the above mitigation options.
Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the project, the applicant shall provide
evidence of the recorded easement(s), deed restriction(s), or evidence of payment to
the City Planning Department or qualifying entity, for approval by the City’s Natural
Resource Manager to demonstrate compliance with this measure.
Packet Pg. 247
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
18
b. Finding The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact AG-3: The project would include development of commercial and residential uses
adjacent to agricultural uses on the project site. This may result in conflict with existing or
future urban and agricultural zoning and uses and adversely affect the long-term viability of
the remaining agricultural uses onsite and at the adjacent SLO City Farm. However, with
implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-3(a) through AG-3(c), which require agricultural
conflict avoidance measures be added to the Specific Plan, agricultural fencing, and buffer
landscaping, as well as compliance with standard APCD dust control measures and City
policies, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.2-20 of
the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 2 establishes a goal to provide a community that maintains
and promotes the land’s agricultural heritage. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 2.1
requires that the Specific Plan encourage open space and agricultural uses that support a
green buffer surrounding residential and commercial neighborhoods in the Specific Plan
area. Specific Plan Policy 2.4 requires strict monitoring of the conversion of active
agriculture to non-agricultural uses and considers the possible effects of new
development on character of the community as a whole. Specific Plan Policy 2.7 requires
incorporation of appropriate agricultural uses in public places and neighborhoods. These
policies are intended to help achieve Specific Plan Goal 2. The Specific Plan also includes
a 72-foot buffer between agricultural operations and urban development to reduce and/
or avoid noise, dust, light impacts, odors, chemical use, access by people and pets,
pilferage, and pesticide drift to new residential and commercial land uses on the project
site. In addition, the Specific Plan proposes that on-site agricultural operations would
transition to organic farming, which would not involve pesticide or chemical fertilizer use
on the site. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measure would be required.
— Mitigation Measure AG-3(a) Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The
following language shall be added to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan:
Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of
public access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g., fencing,
signs, etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as part of purchase
or lease agreements.
— Mitigation Measure AG-3(b) Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall
coordinate with the City to fund installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch
Way and Dalidio Drive/Prado Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass
and vandalism of adjacent agricultural areas.
— Mitigation Measure AG-3(c) Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise,
dust, and pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project
applicant shall ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windbreak
Packet Pg. 248
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
19
hedgerow of trees and shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way
at a sufficient density to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations.
b. Finding The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
B. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-2: Construction of the project would generate temporary increases in localized air
pollutant emissions. Construction emissions of ROG, NOX, and DPM would exceed
SLOAPCD construction thresholds. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures
AQ-2(a) through AG-2(e), which require fugitive dust control measures, standard control
measures for construction equipment, Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for
construction equipment, low or no VOC-emission paint for architectural coatings, and
preparation of a Construction Activity Management Plan (CAMP), this impact would be
reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.3-13 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce construction
emissions of ROG, NOX, DPM, and fugitive dust.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2(a) Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects
shall implement the following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions
in accordance with SLOAPCD requirements.
• Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient
quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering
frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed
(non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD-approved dust suppressant shall be used
whenever possible, to reduce the amount of potable water used for dust control;
• All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities;
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive
grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the SLOAPCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
Packet Pg. 249
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
20
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall
maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of
load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114;
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or
wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent
opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays
and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone
number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division
prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2(b) Standard Control Measures for Construction
Equipment. The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be
implemented during construction activities at the project site:
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified motor
vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road);
• Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or
cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road
Regulation;
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner certification
standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State On-
Road Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
• On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California
Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial
motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds
and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California
based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
1. Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5-
minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation; and,
2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to
power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that
vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than
Packet Pg. 250
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
21
5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
• Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction
identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-
Road Diesel regulation.
• Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to remind
drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
• In addition to the state required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant
shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to
nearby sensitive receptors:
1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the site.
2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors;
4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2(c) Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for
Construction Equipment. The following BACT for diesel-fueled construction
equipment shall be implemented during construction activities at the project site,
where feasible:
• Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and
2010 on-road compliant engines where feasible;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2
diesel particulate filters. These strategies are listed at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2(d) Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels
during the architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used
with levels of 50 g/L or less.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-2(e) Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions
reduction measures and construction practices required to comply with Mitigation
Measures AQ-2(a) through AQ-2(d) shall be documented in a Construction Activity
Management Plan (CAMP) and submitted to SLOAPCD for review and approval at
least three months before the start of construction. The CAMP shall include a Dust
Control Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction equipment (age,
horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip schedule,
construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the
Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring
Packet Pg. 251
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
22
the project below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site
mitigation shall be implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and
ROG emissions to below the Tier 1 threshold.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact AQ-3: Operation of the project would generate air pollutant emissions on an ongoing
daily and annual basis. The project’s daily emissions would exceed SLOAPCD daily
emissions thresholds, but would not exceed annual thresholds. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure AQ-3(a), SLOAPCD Standard Operational Mitigation Measures, and Mitigation
Measure AQ-3(b), Off-Site Mitigation, would reduce emissions to a less than significant level.
(Refer to page 4.3-19 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes a mix of commercial and residential uses, a new
transit connection, and workforce housing intended to balance jobs and housing. The
project also emphasizes bikeways and pedestrian connections, all of which contribute to
reduced VMT and air pollutant emissions. In addition to these project components, the
following mitigation measures would be required to reduce operational emissions. All
feasible on-site mitigation (Mitigation Measure AQ-3[a]) shall be implemented prior to
implementation of off-site mitigation (Mitigation Measure AQ-3[b]).
— Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to
issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall define and incorporate into the San
Luis Ranch Specific Plan standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD
CEQA Air Quality Handbook to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels.
Emission reduction measures shall include, but would not be limited to:
• Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24 requirements
(used in the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent with 2016 Title
24 requirements, whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach the 20 percent
rating cannot be double counted;
• Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low-impact
hydro, biomass and bio-gas); and
• Provide bicycle-share program.
In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in the
SLO Car Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote the
program in their communication tools.
— Mitigation Measure AQ-3(b) Off-site Mitigation. If implementation of standard
emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook
described in Mitigation Measure AQ-3(a) is insufficient to reduce emissions to below
daily threshold levels, then the applicant shall coordinate with SLOAPCD to provide
funding for off-site emission reduction measures to reduce emissions to below daily
Packet Pg. 252
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
23
threshold levels. In accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess emissions
shall be multiplied by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s
current Carl Moyer Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site
mitigation amount. This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project
to determine total off-site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may
include, but would not be limited to:
• Developing or improving park-and-ride lots;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood
combustion devices;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices;
• Constructing satellite worksites;
• Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and heavy-
duty vehicles;
• Replacing/re-powering transit buses;
• Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger or
maintenance vehicles);
• Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program;
• Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road
vehicles;
• Re-powering marine vessels;
• Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary
engines;
• Installing bicycle racks on transit buses;
• Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses, transit
buses or construction fleets;
• Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling
stations for CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.);
• Funding expansion of existing transit services;
• Funding public transit bus shelters;
• Subsidizing vanpool programs;
• Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs;
• Contributing to funding of new bike lanes;
• Installing bicycle storage facilities; and
• Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City
or County Bicycle Master Plans.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Impact BIO-1: Implementation of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on
candidate, sensitive, or special status species that may occur on the project site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h), which require Best
Packet Pg. 253
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
24
Management Practices (BMPs) for construction, Worker Environmental Awareness Program
Training, and avoidance or minimization measures for western pond turtle, two-striped
garter snake, California red-legged frog, steelhead, great blue heron, monarch butterfly,
nesting birds, and roosting bats, would reduce impacts to listed, candidate or special-status
plant and wildlife species to a less than significant level and ensure that the project would
comply with COSE Policies 7.3.1, Protect Listed Species, and 7.3.2, Species of Local Concern.
(Refer to page 4.4-50 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Policy 5.3 and Program 5.3.1 require attention be given to the
preservation of biological and habitat resources through the identification of sensitive
habitats and species early in the development process. Nevertheless, Mitigation Measures
BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) would be required to reduce impacts to special status animal
species.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(a) Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure
the following general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for
construction activity within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area:
• No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction
activities.
• All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed from
the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and properly
disposed of at an appropriate site.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur at
least 100 feet from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not drain
toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective response
to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All workers shall be
informed of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur.
• Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged materials
shall be provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or contaminants
shall be cleaned from the project site and recycled or disposed of to the satisfaction
of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
• Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro San
Luis Channel, the drainage features shall be fenced with orange construction
fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and personnel
unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum of 20 feet
from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall be maintained
throughout the construction period for each phase of development. Once all
phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be removed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate
erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be implemented
to minimize adverse effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic monofilament netting
shall be utilized on site.
• Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to ensure
that wildlife species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks since the
equipment was last parked. Any sensitive wildlife species found during
Packet Pg. 254
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
25
inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the area by a qualified biological
monitor or otherwise trained personnel.
• All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks.
• Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist prior
to construction to confine access routes and construction areas.
• Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to
avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of the
top of the Prefumo Creek bank.
• Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a
qualified biologist such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San Luis
Channel.
• All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow species
that accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open for the
shortest period necessary to complete required work.
• Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the
Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall be cited to avoid high quality habitat and minimize
habitat fragmentation.
• In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to
stop or redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(b) Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training.
Prior to the initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization),
the applicant shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction attend a
Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training.
• The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in
recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The
specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and
habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological
characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and
avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the
work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for
distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with
construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form provided by the trainer
documenting they have attended the WEAP and understand the information
presented to them.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(c) Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake
Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions
are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and
two-striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore,
implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable
and appropriate for two-striped garter snake):
Packet Pg. 255
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
26
• A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours
prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as
potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals
are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall be
allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work activities
begin. The biologist(s) must relocate any western pond turtle the shortest distance
possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be affected
by activities associated with the project.
• Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum
area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to
western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction
staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent
practicable.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(d) California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and
Coast Range Newt Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall
implement the following to avoid and minimize potential impacts to CRLF. Because
coast range newt and western spadefoot are amphibians that utilize similar habitats
to CRLF, implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF shall be
implemented for these species as well.
• Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with the
capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF.
• Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the
USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does not
authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF found
within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no activities shall
occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on its own.
• Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or
jurisdictional areas shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence (such
as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and be buried
into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project site. Plastic
monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The location of
the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence shall remain in
place throughout construction activities. Installation of the exclusion fencing shall
be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is installed correctly.
• During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or
jurisdictional areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any spadefoot
toads that may be excavated/unearthed with native material or found under
vegetation. If the animals are in good health, they shall be immediately relocated
to a designated release area. If they are injured, the animals shall be turned over
to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition to be released
into the designated release area.
Packet Pg. 256
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
27
• To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved
biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian
Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(e) Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The
applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize
potential impacts to steelhead:
• Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a
training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will
include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures that are
being implemented to conserve this species for the project, and the boundaries
within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books, and briefings
may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified person is on hand to
answer any questions.
• During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will
be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and
disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris
will be removed from the work areas.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at
least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a
potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope that
drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that contamination
of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior to the onset of
work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective response to any
accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing
spills and of the appropriate measures to take should an accidental spill occur.
• The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for
construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to achieve
the project goals.
• The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek
for times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work
shall be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and should
ideally occur during the late summer and early fall during the driest portion of the
year; however, water may still be present during construction. If work is proposed
in the streambed and water is present during construction, a diversion will be
required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance and minimization
measures will apply:
1. Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile steelhead, shall
be provided through or around the construction site at all times construction
is occurring within the Prefumo Creek streambed.
2. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be present
onsite during the diversion installation and dewatering process to capture and
relocate any trapped steelhead and/or other fish. Upon approval from the
NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate these individuals the shortest distance
Packet Pg. 257
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
28
possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not likely to be
affected by activities associated with the project.
3. Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen fastened to
the intake hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species from the pump.
4. Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets
installed upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone. The
distance upstream and downstream for block net installation will depend on
the type of construction activities occurring in the streambed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following
BMPs shall be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation
with the City and appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all
attempts to remedy the situation will commence immediately.
1. It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of the
entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in compliance.
2. The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and
sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet
protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm events,
monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite inspections,
problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a map of remedial
implementation measures.
3. Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials (i.e.
soil, spoils, aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) over 2.0 cubic yards
that are not actively being used, consistent with the applicable construction
general permit, or through other means of erosion control approved by the
City (e.g., surrounding with straw bales or silt fencing). The site shall be
maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm drainage system
including existing drainage swales and/or sand watercourses.
a. Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that erosion
and water pollution will be minimized.
b. State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be complied
with.
c. If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes shall be
protected with erosion control measures immediately following grading
on the slopes.
4. Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering
Prefumo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along the top
of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of construction
activities.
• The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and
overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of identifying
and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead or their habitat.
The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend site-specific
measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat.
• Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction
activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily available
during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally released.
Packet Pg. 258
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
29
• In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure
BIO-2(a) would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect
impacts to steelhead from the project are reduced as much as practicable.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact
Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are
undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch
butterflies and nesting great blue herons.
• Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees
near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests
identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of 2015 and
2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis Ranch – Prefumo
Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by Althouse and Meade
(Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch butterfly overwintering
season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch butterflies are present, or
while great blue heron nests are active from February 1 to August 31. If
construction activities must be conducted during these periods, a qualified
biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys and/or nesting great blue
heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance. If surveys do not locate
clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons, construction activities may be
conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting great blue herons are located,
no construction activities shall occur within 100 feet of the edge of the
overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the qualified biologist determines
that no more monarchs are overwintering in the grove or the nest(s) are no longer
active.
• A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan to
be reviewed and approved by the City’s Natural Resource Manager prior to
issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and nesting
habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan may include but
shall not be limited to:
o On- or off-site planting of native shrubs and trees such as Monterey
Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and
monarch butterfly overwintering.
o As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native species.
Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in canopy
or act as windbreaks.
o Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for
removal of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the
current rookery may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same
great blue herons can resume nesting, following methods detailed in
Crouch et al. (2002). It should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat
for great blue herons is experimental and that the relocation techniques
described in Crouch et al. (2002) were used to relocate black-crowned night
heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will
Packet Pg. 259
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
30
be required prior to implementation of the offsite strategy on their
property. The methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002) include:
d. This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the
rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of
breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time,
audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made.
e. Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a
certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine
the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources
Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the
mature trees containing nests across Madonna Road to a suitable
location at Laguna Lake Open Space.
f. Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult
arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new
location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location
will be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following
three breeding seasons.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(g) Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization.
The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and
minimize potential impacts to nesting birds:
• For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally
February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the California
Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys
shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer around the site. If active
nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone
from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a
minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 300 feet for raptor
species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and
the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s)
shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and
young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that
breeding/nesting is completed and young have fledged the nest prior to removal
of the buffer.
• If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be
scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February 14),
after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization.
The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and
minimize potential impacts to roosting bats:
• Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey
of existing structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are
present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season
Packet Pg. 260
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
31
(November through March). The biologist shall have access to all interior attics, as
needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall
be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day,
night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity colony, passive
exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination with CDFW. These
exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to exit the
structure but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure.
• If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat habitat
as determined by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project site or at an
approved location offsite.
• Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a
survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the trees
proposed for removal or trimming harbor sensitive bat species or maternal bat
colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found, the qualified biologist, in close
coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other appropriate passive
relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall be installed
in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices properties to those
which are removed, including access, ventilation, dimensions, height above
ground, and thermal conditions. Maternal bat colonies may not be disturbed.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the project would have a substantial adverse effect on
sensitive habitats, including riparian areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a),
BIO-2(a), BIO-2(b), and BIO-2(c) would reduce direct impacts to sensitive habitats, including
riparian areas, by implementing construction BMPs, including containing construction
activities, debris, and sediment in appropriate locations outside of sensitive habitat to the
maximum extent practicable, and by providing compensatory mitigation for permanently
impacted riparian habitat. In addition Mitigation Measures HWQ-1(a) and HWQ-1(b) include
construction management practices that would reduce construction related impacts to water
quality. When combined with standard regulatory measures (including required permitting
from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB), and regulatory oversight during construction by the
Environmental Monitor, implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce
impacts to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-63 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policy 5.3 and Program 5.3.1 would be required
for the project and are intended to protect and enhances the natural habitats onsite. In
addition, Specific Plan Policy 5.1 would require support of restoration efforts for the creek
and associated habitat. Nevertheless, the following mitigation measure would be required
to address impacts related to sensitive habitats.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(a) Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a
minimum 2:1 ratio (replaced: removed) for temporary and permanent impacts to
riparian habitat. The HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be
Packet Pg. 261
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
32
implemented immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at
a minimum, the following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to be
impacted by habitat type);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be
established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values
of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved];
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size,
ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation
site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting
implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting
plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes, seeding rates, etc.]);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal and
irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than
quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions
and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or
preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be,
at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80 percent
relative cover by vegetation type;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative
impacts to restoration efforts;
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation;
and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for
contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism).
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(b) Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater
measured at diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum
ratio of 3:1 (replaced: removed). Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be
replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and cottonwoods may be planted
from live stakes following guidelines provided in the California Salmonid Stream
Habitat Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container stock (CDFW
2010).
• Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat
Restoration and Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural Resource
Manager.
• The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the
planting of replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that
replacement trees may be planted off-site with approval of the City’s Natural
Resource Manager.
Packet Pg. 262
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
33
• Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which trees
were removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one year
following the date upon which the native trees were removed.
— Mitigation Measure BIO-2(c) Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian
Areas. The Froom Ranch Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside
mapped riparian areas. The placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on
the Development Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall show the bridge’s placement in
relation to existing vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo Creek.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
3. Impact BIO-3: Construction of the project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) andBIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally
protected wetlands, any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural communities to a less than
significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-67 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Goal 5 establishes a goal to provide a community that protects
and enhances the adjacent creek and habitat. Specific Plan Policy 5.1 and Program 5.3.1
would be required of the project and are intended to help achieve this goal through
protection of the creek. However, project-level impacts to jurisdictional areas would
remain potentially significant, and Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) and BIO-2(a) are
required to reduce this impact and ensure consistency with COSE Policy 7.5.5.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
4. Impact BIO-4: Development of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area would not permanently
interfere with the movement of resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established resident or migratory wildlife corridors along Prefumo Creek and through open
agricultural lands on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-
1(c), BIO-1(d), BIO-1(e), BIO-1(f), BIO-1-(h), and BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to
wildlife species, wildlife nursery sites, riparian corridors, and other sensitive natural
communities to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.4-68 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan contains various goals, policies, and
programs intended to protect biological and habitat resources on the project site.
However, because the project would result in temporary impacts to species that use
Prefumo Creek for movement, including migratory birds and raptors, this impact would
be potentially significant.
Implementation of BIO-1(a) requires construction BMPs that would reduce potential
impacts to riparian habitat within the Prefumo Creek corridor. Implementation of
Packet Pg. 263
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
34
Mitigation Measures BIO-1(c), BIO-1(d), and BIO-1(e), would reduce impacts to western
pond turtle, CRLF, coast range newt, and steelhead. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-1(f) would reduce impacts to heron rookeries. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to birds. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to bats roosting in trees. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands, any
riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
5. Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts: Consistent with the LUCE Update EIR, the
project would implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a)
through BIO-2(c) to ensure compliance with the applicable goals and policies of the General
Plan. As a result, the project’s contribution to this cumulative impact would be potentially
significant but mitigable. (Refer to page 4.4-70 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through BIO-
2(c) would be required to reduce cumulative impacts to biological resources to a less than
significant level.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact CR-2: Identified archaeological resources on the project site are ineligible for listing in
the CRHR and NRHP, and disturbance of these resources would not constitute a significant
impact. However, the potential remains for the project to result in impacts to previously
unidentified archaeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-2(a),
Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator, and CR-2(b), Unanticipated Discovery of
Archaeological Resources, would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to a less than
significant level. (Refer to page 4.5-24 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes requirements intended to protect archaeological
resources. Specific Plan Policy 3.5.4 requires a preliminary site survey for development
within archaeologically sensitive areas. As described in Section 4.5.1(d), the Cultural
Resources Study (Appendix G) includes an evaluation of known archaeological resources
on the project site, and determined that these resources are not intact or otherwise
archaeologically significant. However, excavation associated with the project grading
plan would have the potential to encounter buried archaeological deposits. Therefore, the
following mitigation measures are required to ensure that any discovered resources
would be protected and curated if encountered during project construction.
Packet Pg. 264
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
35
— Mitigation Measure CR-2(a) Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance
with Conservation and Open Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal
investigator, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified archaeologist), shall be
retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources.
Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in the
immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried resources
that were not identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor shall also be
present because the area is a culturally sensitive location. The monitor(s) shall be on-
site on a full-time basis during earthmoving activities, including grading, trenching,
vegetation removal, or other excavation activities.
— Mitigation Measure CR-2(b) Unanticipated Discovery of Archeological Resources. In
the event that archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall
be halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist
can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the cultural resource. In
the event that any artifact or an unusual amount of bone or shell is encountered during
construction, work shall be immediately stopped and relocated to another area. The
lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed resource until a
qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36 CFR 800.11.1 and
CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural materials might include:
ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and manos; chipped stone tools
such as projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone not consistent with the immediate
geology such as obsidian or fused shale; historic trash pits containing bottles and/or
ceramics; or structural remains. If the resources are found to be significant, they must
be avoided or will be mitigated consistent with State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) Guidelines.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
E. GEOLOGY
1. Issues Addressed in the Initial Study – Geology and Soils Discussion: Due to the proximity
of the site to the Los Osos Fault and Alquist-Priolo Zone, impacts associated with earthquakes
and ground shaking would be potentially significant. In addition, the project site has been
identified as being located in an area of very high liquefaction potential, moderate to high
expansion potential, and high settlement potential. In addition, during historical drought
years, groundwater levels in the site vicinity were lowered enough to cause subsidence. With
implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1, Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design
and Construction Measures, and GEO-2, Operational Seismic Safety Requirement, impacts
related to geology and soils would be less than significant. (Refer to page 4.14-2 of the Final
EIR.)
Packet Pg. 265
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
36
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts related to
geology and soils.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-1 Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and
Construction Measures. Design and construction of the buildings, roadway
infrastructure and all subgrades shall be specifically proportioned to resist Design
Earthquake Ground Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and SDS=0.832 and engineered
to withstand Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground acceleration
(PGAM) equal to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project
(GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type,
potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation
methods that are available.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-2 Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores
included in the project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the
floor in any area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to prevent
the goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or
restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of
occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy.
— Mitigation Measure GEO-3 Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications
shall include the geotechnical recommendations included in the Soils Engineering
Report, prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein
that shall be incorporated into the final project building plans include specification for
the following components of development preparation and design:
• Building Pad Preparation
• Paved Areas Preparation
• Pavement Design
• Interlocking Concrete Pavers
• Conventional Foundations
• Post-Tensioned Slabs
• Slab-On-Grade Construction
• Retaining Walls
• Exterior Concrete Flatwork
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Impact HAZ-4: Hazardous materials sites identified on and upgradient to the project site as
well as residual pesticides and agricultural chemicals in soil due to historical use of pesticides
and other agricultural chemicals onsite could create a hazard to construction workers during
the construction phase of the project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-4,
Packet Pg. 266
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
37
Soil Sampling and Remediation, impacts related to exposure to residual agricultural
chemicals would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-21 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures would further reduce risk of exposure to
residual agricultural chemicals in on-site soil.
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-4 Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any
grading permits, a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of
land to be graded for development. Soil samples shall be collected under the
supervision of a professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the
presence or absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be
in accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health
Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation. Laboratory
analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of organochlorine
pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and heavy metals in
accordance with EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil sampling indicates the
presence of pesticides or heavy metals exceeding applicable environmental screening
levels, the soil assessment shall identify the volume of contaminated soil to be
excavated.
If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant
remediation, contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent
with construction and an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared.
Cleanup may include excavation, disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment of
conditions subject to regulatory action. All necessary reports, regulations and permits
shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The contaminated materials shall be
remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee
such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency. The
remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency, such
as the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and disposal
procedures shall be followed. Upon completion of the remediation, the environmental
consultant shall prepare a report summarizing the project, the remediation approach
implemented, and the analytical results after completion of the remediation, including
all waste disposal or treatment manifests.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact HAZ-6: The project site is located in an area where geologic analysis for NOA is
required prior to grading and could potentially result in exposure of people to NOA during
grading and construction activities. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-6,
Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization, impacts related to
exposure to NOA would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.7-25 of
the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg. 267
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
38
a. Mitigation: If NOA is identified at the site, an asbestos dust mitigation plan in accordance
with CCR Title 17, Section 93105 Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Construction,
Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations would be required to be implemented
during project construction, as a standard condition of approval. Additionally, the
following mitigation would be required to further reduce potential impacts associated
with NOA hazards:
— Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and
Minimization.
a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be
developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(CalOSHA) requirements. The plan shall include appropriate health and safety
measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. All
construction workers that have the potential to come into contact with
contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the
requirements in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and
personal protective equipment. The health and safety plan shall prescribe
appropriate respiratory protection for construction workers.
b. Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using
polarized light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified
laboratory shall be conducted. Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple
locations across the site, and bedrock samples shall be collected from locations
where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is detected, appropriate
regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of
NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into account the locations
of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and vertical distribution of
contaminants in soil and/or groundwater. The results of the investigation shall be
documented in a report that is signed by a California Professional Geologist. The
report shall include recommendations based upon the findings for additional
investigation/remediation if contaminants are detected above applicable
screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose, groundwater and/or soil vapor
extraction, or in situ bioremediation).
c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the
event that NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These
procedures shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or
general public exposure to potential contaminants in soil. Procedures shall include
efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris piles,
appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and segregation
of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable regulations
associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of contaminated
soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste manifesting). These
procedures may be subject to San Luis Obispo APCD requirements under the
Packet Pg. 268
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
39
California ARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining
Operations.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Impact HWQ-1: During project construction, the surface soil would be subject to erosion and
the downstream watershed would be subject to pollution. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures HWQ-1(a) through HWQ-1(c), which require preparation of and compliance with
a Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Concept Grading Plan and
Master Drainage Plan, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the
potentially significant construction runoff and associated impacts to water quality would be
reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-22 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Section 7.3 of the Specific Plan requires development in the Plan Area to be
designed to conform to stormwater management requirements of the City of San Luis
Obispo, including standards for LID set forth by SWRCB, and construction of retention
and detention systems that would be adequate to meet the needs of future development
and consistent with State and local requirements. Preparation of the required SWPPP and
compliance with applicable State and local regulations would reduce potential impacts to
water quality due to polluted runoff from construction activities. In order to ensure
implementation of SWPPP requirements, incorporation of the following mitigation
measures is required to reduce impacts to water quality due to due to polluted runoff
from construction activities.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(a) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required
actions shall be implemented pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the
project applicant and submitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control
Board under the NPDES Phase II program. At a minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall
including the following BMPs:
• The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during project
grading and construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge of
sediment-laden runoff into stormwater facilities;
• Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce sediment
transport during storms;
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes before
the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th);
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in
front of storm drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through
April 15th); and/or
• Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal.
Packet Pg. 269
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
40
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(b) Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the
applicant shall be required to manage and control runoff by constructing temporary
berms, sediment basins, runoff diversions, or alternative BMP’s as approved by the
RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal, in order to avoid unnecessary siltation into
local streams during construction activities where grading and construction shall
occur in the vicinity of such streams.
• Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be
periodically inspected and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently
document, to the CCRWQCB satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms
and basins during grading.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-1(c) Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As
specified in the SWPPP and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the
applicant shall be required to submit a Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the
Planning Division and City Public Works Director for approval prior to approval of
the VTTM. The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to minimize erosion and
water quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with the project’s
SWPPP. The plans shall include the following:
a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive
drought-tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential.
Geotextile fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation is
established;
b. Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of
100 feet away from drainages on the project site; and
c. Erosion control structures shall be installed.
d. Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize
removal of riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO-2[a]
and BIO-2[b]).
Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning
Division. The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control structures prior to
beginning of construction of any structures, subject to review and approval by the City.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact HWQ-3: During operation, the proposed residential and commercial uses would
increase the quantities of pollutants associated with runoff and sedimentation.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures HWQ-3(a) through HWQ-3(c), which require
stormwater quality treatment controls, preparation of and compliance with a Stormwater
BMP Maintenance Manual, and preparation of a semi-annual stormwater BMP maintenance
report, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the potentially significant
Packet Pg. 270
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
41
impacts to water quality resulting from runoff during operation of the project would be
reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-26 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes retention and detention structures and LID
measures intended to minimize pollutants associated with runoff and sedimentation,
consistent with State and local requirements, including new standards for LID set forth
by SWRCB. Compliance with the CCRWQCB’s Post Construction Requirements, NPDES
discharge permits, the City’s SWMP, Engineering Standards, General Plan, and City
Ordinance requirements would reduce potential impacts to water quality due to polluted
runoff during operation of the project. However, the following mitigation is required to
ensure the inclusion of locally-appropriate stormwater best management practices in the
final design of the stormwater quality system, and to ensure that the stormwater quality
system is maintained in order to ensure continued to ensure long-term operation.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(a) Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP
devices shall be incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the
Master Drainage Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the
stormwater quality system shall be reviewed and approved by the City.
The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs:
• Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and other
pollutants along corridors of planted grasses.
• Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and
nutrients.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(b) Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project
applicant shall prepare a development maintenance manual for the stormwater
quality system BMPs (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance
manual shall include detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of all
stormwater facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post-
construction stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that
stormwater BMP devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with
the manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices
be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and immediately
after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also require that all
devices be checked after major storm events.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-3(c) Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report.
The property manager(s) or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the
City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department a detailed report prepared by a
licensed Civil Engineer addressing the condition of all private stormwater facilities,
BMPs, and any necessary maintenance activities on a semi-annual basis (October 15th
and May 15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and report submittal
shall be recorded against the property.
Packet Pg. 271
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
42
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
3. Impact HWQ-4: Approximately 98 acres of the project site is within the existing 100-year
flood zone. However, proposed grading and elevation modifications would ensure that the
project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area or expose people or
structures downstream of the Specific Plan Area to flood hazards due to increased runoff or
loss of floodplain storage. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HWQ-4, Conditional Letter
of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision, and compliance with existing regulations would
ensure that this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Refer to page 4.8-29
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes a preliminary grading plan that would raise the
elevation of the central portion of the project site above the post-development 100-year
floodplain. The project includes a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) application1
requesting that the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary be redefined consistent with the
proposed site development, creek improvements and bridge, Prado Road Overpass, site
and floodplain grading, and proposed detention facilities. Compliance with required City
Flood Damage Prevention Regulations Code 17.84.050 and flood management measures
including Special Floodplain Management Zone Regulation and the City Waterways
Management Plan would reduce the risk of significant loss or injury as a result of flooding.
In addition, the Specific Plan includes a preliminary drainage plan and retention and
detention structures intended to ensure that that proposed development would not
substantially increase runoff from the project site. Compliance with these State and local
regulations would ensure that downstream flooding impacts would remain less than
significant. The Specific Plan includes excavation and fill in the floodplain, peak flow
management, and channel capacity enhancements for Prefumo Creek and Cerro San Luis
Channel, and would satisfy City flow requirements with the proposed development. With
the implementation of these measures, the project is in compliance with FEMA and City
floodplain regulations and potential floodplain elevation increases affecting other
properties would be avoided. However, the following mitigation is required to ensure the
final grading plan and resulting post-development floodplain would exclude areas
proposed for housing, and confirm that the CLOMR application to redefine the FEMA
100-year floodplain boundary is approved and an official letter of map revision (LOMR)2
is issued by FEMA.
— Mitigation Measure HWQ-4 Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map
Revision. The applicant, in conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare
the CLOMR application and obtain a LOMR from FEMA.
1 A CLOMR is based on proposed conditions and does not change the FIRMs. A CLOMR is the method used by
FEMA to let people know that if projects are constructed per the design submitted to and approved by FEMA, revision
of the FIRM panel with an official letter of map revision (LOMR) is likely.
2 A LOMR is an official revision to the FIRMs issued by FEMA. LOMRs reflect changes to the 100 -year floodplains or
Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) shown on the FIRMs.
Packet Pg. 272
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
43
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
H. LAND USE
1. Impact LU-2: The Specific Plan would be potentially consistent with LAFCO policies for
annexation and agricultural resources, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AG-1
and AG-3. (Refer to page 4.9-40 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would ensure that the Specific Plan
would not result in conflicts between the Specific Plan and San Luis Obispo LAFCO
agricultural Policies 5, 6, 9, 10, and 12. No further mitigation is required in order to reduce
this impact to a less than significant level.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Cumulative Land Use Impacts: The proposed uses are consistent with the intent of the goals
and policies established within the City’s General Plan and Zoning Regulations after
implementation of mitigation required in the Final EIR for this project, and would not
cumulatively contribute to the loss of open space or agricultural land beyond that already
anticipated in the City’s LUCE Update and EIR. Furthermore, the Specific Plan is not expected
to contribute cumulatively to potential airport noise and/or safety issues because it has been
found consistent with the ALUP. As such, cumulative land use impacts would be less than
significant with incorporation of the mitigation listed in the Final EIR for this project. (Refer
to page 4.9-47 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation measures are required.
• Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3
• Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a) through
BIO-2(c)
• Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c)
• Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, and HAZ-6
• Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-5(d)
• Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a) through T-
2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a) through
T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c)
• Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
Packet Pg. 273
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
44
I. NOISE
1. Impact N-4: Future development on the project site would generate operational noise
typically associated with residential, commercial, office, and hotel development. Noise from
the project would not exceed acceptable levels at existing off-site sensitive receptors.
However, noise from new on-site commercial uses may exceed applicable City standards at
proposed on-site residences. Mitigation Measures N-4(a), HVAC Equipment, and N-4(b),
Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier, would ensure that noise levels at
residences on the project site would not exceed the City’s standards for intermittent noise.
(Refer to page 4.10-24 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan orients proposed residential development adjacent to
existing residences and proposed commercial development adjacent to existing
commercial uses. As such, the project’s proposed uses would be compatible with the
existing noise environment of adjacent uses, and this impact would be less than
significant. However, the Specific Plan does not include standards that would ensure that
noise levels at on-site residences located adjacent to proposed retail uses would remain
below applicable City standards. Therefore, the following mitigation measures are
required to ensure that noise levels from proposed new retail uses at residences on the
project site would remain below City standards.
— Mitigation Measure N-4(a) HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be
shielded and located on building rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest
residential property line.
— Mitigation Measure N-4(b) Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier.
If parking areas or loading docks would be located within 250 feet of the residential
properties to the west, a masonry noise barrier shall be installed along the eastern
boundary of the proposed residences adjacent to the commercial land use area on the
eastern portion of the project site. The noise barrier shall be constructed of any
masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and
shall have no openings or gaps.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact N-5: Existing noise sources near the project site include vehicles on local roadways
and U.S. 101. Development of the project would expose future residents on the project site to
traffic noise from local roadways and U.S. 101. With mitigation, traffic noise levels on the
project site would not exceed City standards. Mitigation Measures N-5(a), Interior Noise
Reduction, N-5(b), Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation, N-5(c), Froom
Ranch Way Noise Barrier, and N-5(d), U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel, Parking
Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier, would ensure that traffic noise levels
would not exceed City standards. (Refer to page 4.10-28 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg. 274
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
45
a. Mitigation: Section 3.8.2 of the Specific Plan (Commercial, Office, Hotel Design
Guidelines) requires future development on the project site to include screen walls and
fences around storage areas, open work areas, or refuse collection areas on the project site
to be of sufficient height and material to protect adjacent properties and public streets
from visual and noise impacts.
In addition, Section 2.6, Airport Compatibility Performance Standards, of the Specific Plan
would require that all interior space of residential dwellings, as well as offices, meeting
rooms, public reception areas, worker break rooms, and research, development, and
production areas, meet the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL and 60 dBA Lmax.
However, the Specific Plan does not identify specific measures to achieve the interior
noise standards identified in Section 2.6. Similarly, the Specific Plan does not include
specific mitigative components that would reduce future on-site traffic noise below the
City’s exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL (see Table 4.10-3). Therefore, the following
mitigation measures would be required to reduce interior and exterior noise levels in
outdoor activity areas of proposed residential, hotel, and office uses to a less than
significant level.
— Mitigation Measure N-5(a) Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall
implement the following measures, or similar combination of measures, which
demonstrate that interior noise levels in proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch
Way and Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA
CNEL interior noise standard. The required interior noise reduction shall be achieved
through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques, which may
include (but are not limited to):
• In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such as
air conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be
provided, if mechanical ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise
standards, as demonstrated by a qualified acoustical consultant).
• All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50, consisting
of construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8 inch Type “X”
gypsum board on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch centers and 3 ½ inch
fiberglass insulation.
• All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the noise
reduction provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.
• An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be
provided to the City for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that
the selected windows and doors in combination with wall assemblies would
reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the City’s interior noise standard.
• All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust,
etc.) shall have at least two 90 degree turns in the duct.
• All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner.
Sliding window panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and
the window frames shall be caulked to the wall opening around the perimeter with
Packet Pg. 275
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
46
a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors
shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in the closed position.
The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a
qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction
techniques included in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would
achieve interior noise levels that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL.
— Mitigation Measure N-5(b) Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation.
Outdoor activity areas (e.g., patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared
multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be
protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the City’s exterior standard of 60
dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from traffic noise such that
intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or shall include noise barriers capable of
reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas shall
be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise barriers may
be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or masonry material
with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no
openings or gaps. The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development
Department by a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the specific outdoor
noise reduction techniques in combination with the orientation of outdoor activity
areas of shared multifamily residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and
offices would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
— Mitigation Measure N-5(c) Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier
or alternative barrier, such as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern
property line of residential lots that abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity
areas (patios and pools) at these residences from sound intrusion from traffic along
Froom Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high
barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring residences from the final
grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a higher final
elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds
per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used,
the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a
qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific exterior noise reduction
techniques included would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA
CNEL.
— Mitigation Measure N-5(d) U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel
includes an outdoor activity area (such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or
alternative barrier, such as berms, landscaping, or glass, must be installed along the
eastern property line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101 right of way to protect
these outdoor activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S. 101. If a
masonry noise barrier is implemented, the noise barrier shall provide, at minimum,
an 8 foot high barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever
Packet Pg. 276
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
47
use (i.e., U.S. 101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds
per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is used,
the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a
qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific exterior noise reduction
techniques included in the hotel component of the project would achieve exterior
noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
J. RECREATION
1. Impact REC-1: The project would accommodate new residents in the City of San Luis Obispo
who will use existing and planned parks and recreation facilities. Provision of on-site parks
and recreation facilities would not meet the adopted City parkland standard for the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan Area. Mitigation Measure REC-1, which requires payment of the City’s
required parkland in-lieu fees, would ensure compliance with the policies and performance
standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project. (Refer to page 4.11-7 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan includes requirements intended to protect open space and
recreation areas. Specific Plan Policies 1.5, 4.1, 4.4, and 5.4 require the promotion and
integration of parks and recreational space throughout the plan area and development
components. Although the project includes development of 3.4 acres of parkland it would
result in a 2.4-acre shortfall in parkland standard for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
Area. Therefore, the following mitigation measure would be required to reduce impacts
to parks and recreational facilities
— Mitigation Measure REC-1 Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay
parkland in-lieu fees in accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for
the parkland shortage. The project’s specific fee shall be determined by the City at the
time of project approval, after accounting for parkland provided within the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from the project shall be directed
to new projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities within the
City of San Luis Obispo parks system.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Cumulative Recreation Impacts: The project would not meet the Citywide parkland
standards and would exacerbate the exiting shortfall of parks and recreational facilities within
the City. With payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees to ensure compliance with
the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the project,
Packet Pg. 277
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
48
required by Mitigation Measure REC-1, the project contribution to cumulative impacts
associated with parks and recreational facilities would be reduced to a less than significant
level. (Refer to page 4.11-8 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measure REC-1 would be required to reduce the project
contribution to cumulative impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
K. TRANSPORTATION
1. Impact T-4: Project construction activities would create traffic impacts due to construction
vehicles causing congestion and deteriorating pavement conditions. Mitigation would reduce
these impacts to an acceptable level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure T-4, Construction
Traffic Management Plan, would ensure that impacts associated with construction traffic
would be less than significant after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-81 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation is required to reduce potentially significant
construction traffic impacts.
— Mitigation Measure T-4 Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to
construction, a traffic management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by
the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan
shall be based on the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction,
physical constraints, nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle,
pedestrian, driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include:
• Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign
informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements shall
occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the project
construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus
schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during
school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be impacted
during construction.
• Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be maintained
to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall receive advance
notice of work adjacent to their property access and when driveways would be
potentially closed.
• Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is maintained
for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the beginning and end of
the school day.
• Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by buses,
bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools.
Packet Pg. 278
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
49
• Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at intersections
that are determined to be unacceptably congested based on the City’s most
recently adopted traffic impact thresholds due to construction traffic.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2. Impact T-5: Construction of the proposed Froom Ranch Way bridge during phase 3 of the
Specific Plan buildout would result in significant level of service and queuing impacts at
study area intersections and roadway segments. Mitigation Measure T-5, Froom Ranch Way
Bridge Phasing, would ensure that LOS and queuing impacts associated with the project’s
proposed infrastructure phasing would be less than significant after mitigation. (Refer to page
4.12-83 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The following mitigation is required to reduce potentially significant LOS and
queuing impacts that would result from the project’s proposed infrastructure phasing.
— Mitigation Measure T-5 Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way
bridge connection shall be completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific
Plan buildout.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
3. Impact T-6: The project site plan would result in and contribute to increased access conflicts.
Proposed access controls are not consistent with General Plan policy. Mitigation Measure T-
6, Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control, would ensure that the project would be
consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2, and would ensure that
transportation impacts due to access conflicts would be reduced to a less than significant level
after mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-84 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Specific Plan Policies 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 are intended to integrate the proposed
new development and associated circulation into the City’s existing circulation system by
ensuring a multimodal approach to the transportation networks for the Specific Plan Area,
development of a circulation system that interfaces with existing adjacent streets and
paths, and development of a safe and efficient circulation system that successfully
interfaces with adjacent streets and paths. The project proposes signalized control at
various intersections. However, General Plan Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2 requires
roundabout control, unless otherwise physically infeasible. Therefore, the following
mitigation is required to ensure that the project would be consistent with General Plan
Circulation Element Policy 7.1.2.
— Mitigation Measure T-6 Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway
intersections within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout
Packet Pg. 279
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
50
design, unless the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control
is physically infeasible.
b. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
4. Impact T-7: The project site plan would result in on-site traffic volumes and speeds that may
exceed General Plan policy thresholds, resulting potential traffic hazards within the project
site. Mitigation Measure T-7, Traffic Calming Features, would ensure that potential traffic
hazards within the Specific Plan area would be reduced to a less than significant level after
mitigation. (Refer to page 4.12-85 of the Final EIR.)
c. Mitigation: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Policies 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 are intended to integrate
the proposed new development and associated circulation into the City’s existing
circulation system by ensuring a multimodal approach to the transportation networks for
the Specific Plan Area, development of a circulation system that interfaces with existing
adjacent streets and paths. The proposed layout of San Luis Ranch Road and other
roadways internal to the Specific Plan area would result in on-site traffic speeds that
would exceed General Plan thresholds, which may result in potential traffic hazards
within the Specific Plan area. Therefore, the following mitigation is required to ensure that
on-site traffic volumes and speeds would not exceed General Plan policy thresholds, and
potential traffic hazards along on-site collector and residential streets would be reduced.
— Mitigation Measure T-7 Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along
San Luis Ranch Road shall include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections,
and traffic-calming features, such as diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments.
d. Finding: The City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project to avoid or lessen to a less than significant level the significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
Packet Pg. 280
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
51
SECTION 6. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT FOR WHICH SUFFICIENT
MITIGATION IS NOT AVAILABLE
Class I impacts are significant and unavoidable. To approve a project resulting in Class I impacts, the
CEQA Guidelines require decision makers to make findings of overriding consideration that "... specific
legal, technological, economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or
alternatives identified in the EIR...".
This section presents the project’s significant environmental impacts and feasible mitigation
measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR])
and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code require a lead agency to make findings for each
significant environmental impact disclosed in an EIR. Specifically, for each significant impact, the
lead agency must find that:
• Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR;
• Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or
can and should be adopted by that agency; or
• Specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR infeasible.
Each of these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.
This section identifies impacts that can be reduced, but not to a less-than-significant level, through
the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures into the project, and which therefore, remain
significant and unavoidable, as identified in the Final EIR. The impacts identified in this section
are considered in the same sequence in which they appear in the EIR. Where adoption of feasible
mitigation measures is not effective in avoiding an impact or reducing it to a less-than-significant
level, the feasibility of adopting alternatives to the proposed project is considered in Section 7 of
this document.
A. AIR QUALITY
1. Impact AQ-1: The project would be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan
because it would result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that would exceed the
rate of population growth. (Refer to page 4.3-9 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-3(a) through AQ-3(b) are
recommended to improve consistency with the CAP. The following additional measure is
also required:
• Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or
developers of individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include
Packet Pg. 281
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
52
provisions to encourage employers within the proposed office components of the
project to implement telecommuting programs and include teleconferencing
capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow employees to
attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the area.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 is feasible and has been adopted. However,
mitigation is not available that would reduce projected VMT such that the project’s vehicle
trip rate increase would not exceed population growth in the region. Therefore, impacts
related to consistency with the 2001 CAP would remain significant and unavoidable. A
statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8.
2. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts: The project is inconsistent with the 2001 CAP and would
exceed SLOAPCD construction and operational thresholds. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would
reduce this cumulative impact to the maximum extent feasible. However, no additional
mitigation is available to address cumulative air quality impacts. As such, cumulative impacts
on air quality would remain significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.3-30 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce this cumulative impact to the
maximum extent feasible. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the
project objectives.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 is feasible and has been adopted. However, no
additional feasible mitigation is available for cumulative air quality impacts, which would
remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this
impact is made in Section 8.
B. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impact CR-1: The project would result in the relocation, demolition, and removal of structures
on the San Luis Ranch property which are individually identified as historic resources. In
addition, the project would eliminate the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is eligible for listing
as a historic resource. Relocation, demolition, and/or removal of these historic resources
would permanently alter the historic context of the project site and on-site structures.
Required Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c), which require a relocation and
reconstruction plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main
barn, archival documentation of historic buildings, and informational displays of historic
resources, would reduce this impact to the maximum extent feasible. However, mitigation
would not avoid the removal of the main barn, despite the proposed reuse of salvageable
materials from the structure to the greatest extent possible in the construction of a new barn
in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center. Therefore, the potential
impact to the San Luis Ranch Complex and the main barn individuall y would remain
Packet Pg. 282
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
53
significant and unavoidable despite implementation of the required mitigation. (Refer to page
4.5-20 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan proposes programs and policies intended to
reduce impacts to historical resources to the maximum extent practicable. The following
additional measures are also required:
• Mitigation Measure CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction
Plan. In order to implement Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction
plan for the former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, main residence, and main barn
shall be developed by a qualified historic architect. The plan shall include a
structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity and conditions and
include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic integrity is
retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved.
• Mitigation Measure CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The
applicant shall provide archival documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as-
built and as-found condition in the form of a Historic American Building Survey
(HABS) Level II documentation. The documentation shall comply with the Secretary
of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (NPS
1990), and shall include large-format photographic recordation, detailed historic
narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be
completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary
of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural
History (NPS 1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as
donated material to the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of
the documentation shall also be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library.
• Mitigation Measure CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A
retrospective interpretive display detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex
and the project site, its significance, and its important details and features shall be
developed by the applicant. The information should be incorporated into a publicly-
accessed building on the project site, such as the proposed Agricultural Heritage
Facilities and Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location. The display
shall include images and details from the HABS documentation described in
Mitigation Measure CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic
property. The content shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or
historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS 1983).
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) are feasible and have been
adopted. Mitigation Measure CR-1(a) would mitigate impacts to the main residence and
barn/viewing stand to the maximum extent feasible, and that Mitigation Measures CR-
1(b) and CR-1(c) would reduce significant direct impacts to the remainder of the
Packet Pg. 283
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
54
historically significant San Luis Ranch Complex, including the individually significant
historic main barn, to the maximum extent feasible. However, the removal and/or
demolition of the historically significant main barn and the relocation, demolition, and
removal of other structures in the San Luis Ranch Complex would change the historic
context of the San Luis Ranch property. Furthermore, mitigation would not avoid the
removal of the main barn, despite the proposed reuse of salvageable materials from the
structure to the greatest extent possible in the construction of a new barn in the project’s
proposed Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center. Therefore, the potential impact to
the San Luis Ranch Complex and the main barn individually would remain significant
and unavoidable despite implementation of the required mitigation. A statement of
overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8.
2. Cumulative Cultural Resources Impacts: The project would result in a significant and
unavoidable impact associated with the removal, relocation, or reconstruction of individually
historic structures that are part of the historically significant San Luis Ranch Complex. As
such, the project would contribute to the cumulative loss of historic resources in the City.
Required Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) would reduce this cumulative impact
to historical resources to the maximum extent feasible. However, no additional mitigation is
available to address this cumulative impact. Therefore, cumulative cultural resources impacts
would remain significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.5-26 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: The Specific Plan contains goals and policies which would reduce cumulative
impacts to historic and cultural resources. In addition, implementation of Mitigation
Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) would further reduce cumulative impacts to historic
resources. No other feasible mitigation is available that would meet the project objectives.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c) are feasible and have been
adopted. No additional feasible mitigation is available for the cumulative loss of historic
resources in the City, which would remain a significant and unavoidable impact. A
statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8.
C. LAND USE
1. Impact LU-1: The Specific Plan would be potentially consistent with the majority of adopted
City policies in the General Plan, with implementation of Mitigation Measures throughout
the Final EIR. The project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted General Plan
policies designed to protect historical resources. Required Mitigation Measures in the EIR
would reduce inconsistencies with General Plan policies to the maximum extent feasible.
However, Specific Plan conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards) and
Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) would remain potentially
inconsistent. The City acknowledges the importance and breadth of the potential
inconsistencies associated with the Specific Plan by finding them to be significant and
unavoidable impacts. (Refer to page 4.9-9 of the Final EIR.)
Packet Pg. 284
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
55
a. Mitigation: The incorporation of Mitigation Measures AG-1, AG-3, BIO-1(a) through BIO-
1(h), BIO-2(a) through BIO-2(c), CR-1(a) through CR-1(c), GEO-1, GEO-3, HAZ-4, HAZ-6,
N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-5(d), and T-1(a) through T-1(i),
T-2(a) through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g), T-9(a)
through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c), would ensure that the majority of potential
conflicts between the San Luis Obispo City General Plan and the Specific Plan would be
reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures CR-1(a) through CR-1(c)
would reduce potential conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards)
and Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) to the maximum
extent feasible.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. The mitigation measures are feasible and have been adopted. However,
Specific Plan conflicts with Land Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design Standards) and
Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions) were identified in the
Final EIR as potentially inconsistent. A statement of overriding considerations for this
impact is made in Section 8.
D. NOISE
1. Impact N-1: Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San
Luis Obispo Municipal Code regulations. Required Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through N-
1(g) require implementation of noise reduction devices and techniques during construction,
and would reduce noise associated with on- and off-site construction activity to the maximum
extent feasible. Although Mitigation Measure N-1(a) would reduce impacts from haul trucks
by requiring the haul route to avoid residential areas and noise sensitive uses where possible,
haul truck noise would continue to exceed the 75 dBA threshold for intermittent noise.
Therefore, noise impacts from haul trucks would be minimized, but not eliminated. As a
result, temporary noise impacts associated with off-site construction activity would be
significant and unavoidable. (Refer to page 4.10-15 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Implementation of the following measures would reduce noise impacts to the
maximum extent feasible and are required.
• N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks
shall utilize roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive receptors
where possible. The applicant shall submit a proposed construction vehicle and
hauling route for City review and approval prior to grading/building permit
issuance. The approved construction vehicle and hauling route shall be used for soil
hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration of construction.
• N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public service
utilities, or where an exception is issued by the Community Development
Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00
Packet Pg. 285
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
56
AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset, such that the sound creates a
noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family residential, 80 dBA for multi-
family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land uses across a
residential or commercial property line.
• N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all
construction activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be employed
to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the City of San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such techniques shall
include:
o Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
o Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65
dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a
sound transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate
sound) of 25.
o All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall
be equipped with factory-recommended mufflers.
o For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas
with appropriate acoustic shielding on building and grading plans.
Equipment and shielding shall be installed prior to construction and
remain in the designated location throughout construction activities.
o Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power
tools.
o The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of
passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be
limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through
Saturday. No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or
official holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
o Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites
and affected uses.
• N-1(d). Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise
Complaints. The contractor shall inform residents and business operators at
properties within 300 feet of the project site of proposed construction timelines and
noise complaint procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction
noise. Proof of mailing the notices shall be provided to the Community Development
Department before the City issues a zoning clearance. Signs shall be in place before
beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related
complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through N-1(d) are feasible and have been
adopted. Available mitigation would not reduce the noise below the applicable City
standards for relatively long term construction activity. Therefore temporary noise
impacts associated with on-site construction activity would be significant and
Packet Pg. 286
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
57
unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section
8.
E. TRANSPORTATION
1. Impact T-1: Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions nine study area
intersections would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on
adopted multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page
4.12-43 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-1(a) through T-1(i) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The
project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for
calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond
the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits,
reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-1(a) through T-1(i) would reduce impacts to
multimodal level of service at study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus
Project conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-1(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
o City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes
(ongoing)
• T-1(b). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road.
o Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road to 310’ (Phase 1)
o Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1)
o Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1)
o Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado
Road/Dalidio Drive to Madonna Road (Phase 1)
o Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1)
o Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1)
• T-1(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2)
• T-1(d). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street.
o Optimize Signal Timing
Packet Pg. 287
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
58
• T-1(e). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
o Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on northbound Froom Ranch Way
approach to Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge
construction)
o Extend right turn lane on southbound Froom Ranch Way approach to Los
Osos Valley Road to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
o Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to
eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge
construction)
• T-1(f). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way.
o Signalization (Phase 1)
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• T-1(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2)
o Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement
(Phase 1)
• T-1(h). Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way.
o Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed)
• T-1(i). Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway.
o Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when
connection is constructed)
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-1(a), T-1(c) through T-1(d), and T-1(f) through T-
1(i) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Madonna
Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may
reduce the feasibility of Mitigation Measures T-1(b) and T-1(e). Accordingly, the potential
impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for Existing and
Near-Term Plus Project conditions at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos
Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less
than significant level. Therefore, the potential impacts to multimodal level of service at
the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain
significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is
made in Section 8.
2. Impact T-2: Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at
19 study area intersections would exceed lane capacities. (Refer to page 4.12-58 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(j) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
Packet Pg. 288
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
59
study area intersections under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The
project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for
calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond
the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits,
reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(j) would reduce impacts
associated with lane capacities identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project
conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-2(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• T-2(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• T-2(c). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps.
o Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1)
• T-2(d). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• T-2(e). Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound
ramps, Phase 2)
• T-2(f). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
o Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach
to northbound Froom Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge
construction)
o Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound
Froom Ranch Way to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction)
o Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to
eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge
construction)
• T-2(g). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
o Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1)
• T-2(h). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• T-2(i). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street.
o Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1)
Packet Pg. 289
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
60
• T-2(j). Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street.
o Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1)
o Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1)
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-2(a) through T-2(e) and T-2(g) through T-2(j) are
feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Los Osos Valley
Road & Froom Ranch Way intersection may reduce the feasibility Mitigation Measure T-
2(f). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for
Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom
Ranch Way intersection may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a
result, impacts to lane capacities at the Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersection under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions would remain
significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is
made in Section 8.
3. Impact T-3: Under Existing and Near-Term conditions four study area segment groups would
operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted
multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-63
of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(d) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
study area roadway segments under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project Conditions. The
project’s equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for
calculating equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond
the project’s equitable share can be addressed through such options as fee credits,
reimbursement agreements, or development agreements, based on City requirements.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(d) would reduce impacts
associated with multimodal level of service standards at study area roadway segments
identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-3(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera Street)
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
o Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min
o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
• T-3(b). Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road)
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound
ramps, Phase 2)
o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
Packet Pg. 290
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
61
• T-3(c). Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to Higuera Street)
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound
ramps, Phase 2)
o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3)
• T-3(d). Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to Higuera
Street)
o Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado
Road is constructed/improved)
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-3(a) through T-3(c) are feasible and have been
adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints along the Higuera Street segments (Segments
#7 and #8) may reduce the feasibility of (Mitigation Measure T-3(b). Accordingly, the
potential impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards identified for
Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions along the Higuera Street segments
(Segments #7 and #8) may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. As a
result, impacts associated with multimodal level of service standards at the Higuera Street
segments (Segments #7 and #8) under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions
would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for
this impact is made in Section 8.
4. Impact T-8: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would
operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal
level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-87 of the Final
EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-8(a) through T-8(g) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s
equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating
equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable
share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements,
or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures T-8(a) through T-8(g) would reduce impacts to multimodal level of service at
study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[b])
Packet Pg. 291
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
62
• T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[e]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f])
• T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way.
▪ Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation
Measure T-1[f])
• T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[f])
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-8(c) through T-8(g) are feasible and have been
adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and
Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may reduce the feasibility of
Mitigation Measures T-8(a) and T-8(b). Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with
multimodal level of service standards identified for Cumulative Plus Project conditions at
the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, the
potential impacts to multimodal levels of service at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive
and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections under Cumulative Plus
Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A statement of overriding
considerations for this impact is made in Section 8.
5. Impact T-9: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 18 study area
intersections would exceed lane capacities. (Refer to page 4.12-97 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-9(a) through T-9(m) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
study area intersections under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s
equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating
equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable
Packet Pg. 292
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
63
share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements,
or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures T-9(a) through T-9(m) would reduce impacts associated with lane capacities
identified for Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
o Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’
o Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’
• T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[b])
o Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’
• T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[b])
• T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T-
1[b])
• T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street.
o Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’
o Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’
• T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[d]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f])
• T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street.
Packet Pg. 293
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
64
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[g])
• T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road.
o Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
2[j])
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-9(a) through T-9(b), T-9(d) through T-9(g), and T-
9(i) through T-9(m) are feasible and have been adopted. Potential right-of-way constraints
at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersections may reduce the feasibility of Mitigation Measures T-9(c) and T-9(h).
Accordingly, the potential impacts associated with lane capacities identified for
Cumulative Plus Project conditions at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos
Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections may not be feasibly mitigated to a less
than significant level. As a result, impacts to lane capacities at the Madonna Road &
Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections under
Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant and unavoidable. A
statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in Section 8.
6. Impact T-10: Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions five study area segment groups, as
well as mainline segments of U.S. 101, would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted multimodal level of service standards during
AM and PM peak hours. (Refer to page 4.12-101 of the Final EIR.)
a. Mitigation: Mitigation Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) identify improvements at study
area facilities that are required to reduce potentially significant project-specific impacts at
study area roadway segments under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. The project’s
equitable share of these improvements will be calculated using the method for calculating
equitable mitigation measures outlined in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies (Caltrans, December 2002). Costs above and beyond the project’s equitable
share can be addressed through such options as fee credits, reimbursement agreements,
or development agreements, based on City requirements. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) would reduce impacts associated with multimodal level
of service standards at study area roadway segments identified for Cumulative Plus
Project conditions to a feasible extent.
• T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley Road).
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
Packet Pg. 294
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
65
• T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101
Northbound Ramps).
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
• T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom Ranch
Way).
o Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
b. Finding: The City finds that specific economic, social, legal, technological, or other
considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR infeasible. Mitigation Measures T-10(a) through T-10(c) are feasible and have been
adopted. However, potential impacts identified for the northbound and southbound lanes
of the mainline segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road under
Cumulative Plus Project conditions would not be mitigated to a less than significant level.
No additional mitigation measures are feasible due to economic and physical constraints.
As a result, impacts under Cumulative Plus Project conditions would remain significant
and unavoidable. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact is made in
Section 8.
Packet Pg. 295
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
66
SECTION 7. FINDINGS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED
PROJECT
A. INTRODUCTION
As identified in Section 6 of this document, the proposed project will cause the following
significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to occur:
• Impact AQ-1: Clean Air Plan (CAP) consistency
• Cumulative air quality impact
• Impact CR-1: Removal of historic resources
• Cumulative cultural resource impact
• Impact LU-1: Potential City policy inconsistency
• Impact N-1: Temporary construction activity noise
• Impact T-1: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area intersections under
Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions
• Impact T-2: Traffic volumes exceeding lane capacities under Existing and Near-Term Plus
Project conditions
• Impact T-3: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area roadway segments
under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions
• Impact T-8: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area intersections under
Cumulative Plus Project conditions
• Impact T-9: Traffic volumes exceeding lane capacities under Cumulative Plus Project
conditions
• Impact T-10: Unacceptable multimodal level of service at study area roadway segments,
including mainline segments of U.S. 101, under Cumulative Plus Project conditions
Because the proposed project will cause significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to
occur as identified above, the City must consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior
alternatives to the project, as proposed. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these
alternatives could substantially lessen or avoid the unavoidable significant environmental effects.
As such, the environmental superiority and feasibility of each alternative to the project is
considered in this section. Specifically, this section evaluates the effectiveness of these alternatives
in reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
B. DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR for the project evaluates the following four alternatives to the project: (1) a no
project, no development alternative; (2) a no project, existing entitlements alternative; (3) an
alternative that would retain the San Luis Ranch Farm Complex; and (4) an alternative that would
retain 50 percent of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open space.
1. Alternative 1: No Project, No Development. As required by CEQA, this EIR evaluates the
environmental consequences of not proceeding with the project. This alternative assumes that
Packet Pg. 296
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
67
the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted, that none of the proposed entitlements are
implemented, including annexation to the City, and that no further development would occur
on the project site. The project site would continue to support existing agricultural land uses,
and the existing structures on the site would remain.
2. Alternative 2: No Project, Measure J Entitlements. This alternative assumes that the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted and that none of the proposed entitlements are
implemented, including annexation to the City. Therefore, this alternative represents a project
that would be processed by San Luis Obispo County, and considers what would be
reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans and consistency
with available infrastructure and community services. There are existing entitlements on the
project site for development in the County from the voter-approved initiative known as
“Measure J,” which was passed in 2006 and upheld in 2009. The Measure J entitlements
include 60 multi-family dwelling units, 560,000 square feet of regional commercial and
outdoor sales areas, 198,000 square feet of office space, and a 150-room hotel and ancillary
facilities. Because the Measure J entitlements would leave the project site under the
jurisdiction of the County, but surrounded entirely by the City limit, these entitlements would
also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite wastewater treatment
facility. Figure 6-1 of the Final EIR depicts the Measure J site plan and approximate
development area of this alternative.
3. Alternative 3: Historical Resource Preservation. This alternative assumes that the San Luis
Ranch Farm Complex, as well as associated eucalyptus trees, located in the northwest portion
of the project site would be retained, and that the proposed multi-family residential
development would be relocated and integrated into the proposed single-family residential
development area on the central portion of the project site. This configuration would likely
result in fewer single-family homes and a corresponding increase in the number of multi-
family or cluster-style residential development in order to preserve the total residential unit
count on the project site. Figure 6-2 of the Final EIR depicts the approximate development
area of this alternative.
4. Alternative 4: 50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space. This alternative would retain 50 percent
of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open space uses to be consistent on-site with
the City’s General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. This alternative would retain the
portion of land designated for commercial uses (NC) southeast of Froom Ranch Way and
southwest of Prado Road in agriculture. This alternative would reduce the portion of the site
available for residential and commercial development on the project site.
C. EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVES IN AVOIDING SIGNIFICANT PROJECT
IMPACTS
This section evaluates the effectiveness of the alternatives in reducing the significant and
unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
1. Significant and Unavoidable Air Quality Impacts. The proposed project would result in
significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts related to Clean Air Plan
Packet Pg. 297
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
68
(CAP) inconsistency. Under Alternative 1 (No Project, No Development), no development
would occur, and no additional vehicle trips would be generated; therefore air quality
impacts would be substantially reduced. Under Alternative 2 (No Project, Measure J
Entitlements), additional vehicle trips would result in increased emissions compared to the
proposed project, which would cumulatively impact air quality; therefore air quality impacts
would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 3 (Historical Resource Preservation)
would provide denser residential development, incrementally reducing vehicle miles
traveled and associated air pollutant emissions; therefore, air quality impacts would be
incrementally reduced, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 4 (50%
On-Site Agriculture/Open Space) would also result in fewer trips and emissions, as a result
of the reduced total number of dwelling units and expected population compared to the
proposed project; however, the significant cumulative air quality impacts would not be
avoided.
2. Significant and Unavoidable Cultural Resources Impacts. The proposed project would
result in significant and unavoidable project-level and cumulative impacts to historic
resources as a result of the removal of the San Luis Ranch Complex. Alternative 1 and
Alternative 3 would not remove the San Luis Ranch Complex; therefore, the project-level and
cumulative impact to historic resources would not occur. Alternative 2 would remove the San
Luis Ranch Complex, but would not relocate, reconstruct, or otherwise preserve or document
the historic San Luis Ranch Complex or its individually historic structures; therefore, impacts
to historic resources would be greater in comparison to the project Alternative 4 would
remove the San Luis Ranch Complex, similar to the proposed project; therefore, the project-
level and cumulative impact to historic resources would remain significant and unavoidable.
3. Significant and Unavoidable Land Use/Policy Consistency Impact. The proposed project
would result in significant and unavoidable land use impacts due to potential inconsistencies
with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to protect historical resources and
ensure adequate multimodal transportation levels of service. Under Alternative 1, no
development would occur; therefore, the significant and unavoidable land use impact would
be avoided. Alternative 2 would result in a project developed by San Luis Obispo County,
rather than the City, which would not be required to be consistent with the City’s General
Plan, making it impossible for the City to achieve the goals established for this area in the
General Plan, as well as overall General Plan goals related to housing, agricultural protection,
minimizing impacts to creeks, and circulation; therefore, this alternative would result in
greater inconsistencies with the General Plan, and this impact would remain significant and
unavoidable. Alternative 3 would not remove the San Luis Ranch Complex; therefore, this
alternative would not conflict with adopted City policies in the General Plan designed to
protect historical resources; therefore, this alternative would reduce inconsistencies with the
General Plan, but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 4 would
dedicate one half of the total project site for agriculture and open space, achieving on-site
consistency with General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f. However, Alternative 4 would
remain potentially inconsistent with General Plan policies designed to protect historical
resources and ensure adequate multimodal transportation levels of service; therefore, impacts
to land use would remain significant and unavoidable.
Packet Pg. 298
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
69
4. Significant and Unavoidable Temporary Noise Impacts. The proposed project would cause
temporary noise impacts as a result of construction activity associated with project
development. Under Alternative 1, no development would occur; therefore, the significant
and unavoidable construction noise impact would be avoided. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would
result in a similar level of overall construction activity on the project site, and would therefore
result in similar significant and unavoidable impacts associated with temporary construction
noise.
5. Significant and Unavoidable Transportation Impacts. The proposed project would result in
project-level transportation impacts associated with potentially infeasible transportation
mitigation measures at the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road &
Froom Ranch Way intersections and cumulative transportation impacts along the mainline
segments of U.S. 101 at Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road due to increased vehicle
use of these facilities. Under Alternative 1, no development would occur; therefore, the
significant and unavoidable transportation impacts would be avoided. Alternative 2 would
result in an incrementally higher number of vehicle trips to and from the project site;
therefore, this alternative would result in greater transportation impacts that would remain
significant and unavoidable. Alternatives 3 and 4 would incrementally reduce the number of
vehicle trips to and from the project site. However, project-generated vehicle traffic would
still exceed the capacity and LOS thresholds for area intersections and roadways; therefore,
impacts to transportation under these alternatives would remain significant and unavoidable.
D. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE AND FEASIBILITY OF
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
1. Finding: Alternative 1 (No Project, No Development) is environmentally superior overall,
since no development would occur under the City jurisdiction. However, the existing Land
Use Element establishes the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area as a City Expansion Area and
requires that a Specific Plan be adopted prior to urban development. Alternative 1 fails to
meet the City’s objectives for the project area as well as any of the project objectives. As a
result, the City finds that Alternative 1 would be infeasible to implement.
2. Finding: Alternative 2 (No Project, Measure J Entitlements) would result in increased physical
environmental impacts when compared to the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. With
a higher density, commercially-focused design, this alternative requires more disturbed area,
resulting in less of the site being retained in agriculture and open space. This alternative
would also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite wastewater
treatment facility. Alternative 2 does not avoid any of the Class I impacts associated with the
proposed project, and would not meet the project objectives to provide infill growth, preserve
agricultural land and open space, create significant entry-level, workforce housing
opportunities, implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design, create new commercial
office and hotel opportunities, develop an agricultural heritage facilities & learning center,
establish a link in the Bob Jones Regional Trail, and provide a fair-share financial contribution
toward public circulation improvements. As a result, the City finds that Alternative 2 is not
environmentally superior to the proposed project, and would not satisfy the project
objectives.
Packet Pg. 299
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
70
3. Finding: Among the development scenarios, Alternative 3 (Historical Resource Preservation)
would be considered environmentally superior. This alternative is considered
environmentally superior to the proposed San Luis Ranch Specific Plan for each issue except
for aesthetics, agricultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, recreation,
transportation, utilities and service systems, and water resources. Alternative 3 avoids the
Class I impact related to historical resources by avoiding development on the northwest
portion of the project site near Madonna Road, where the San Luis Ranch Complex is located.
However, this alternative would result in greater impacts to transportation, because the
proposed roadway connection through the northwestern portion of the project site near
Madonna Road would not be constructed. This would result in increased traffic loading on
other access roadways into the Specific Plan area, including Froom Ranch Way, Dalidio Drive,
and the proposed Prado Road extension. Alternative 3 would not meet the project objectives
to implement a walkable-bikeable neighborhood design integrated with public transit and
open space amenities and develop an agriculture heritage facilities & learning center.
Alternative 3 would not develop the northwest portion of the project site near Madonna Road,
and without the associated pedestrian and bicycle connections to Madonna Road, would be
inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide pedestrian and bicycle
connections to off-site amenities, such as Laguna Lake Park, commercial uses in the project
site vicinity, and off-site transit connections, which is a project objective and City priority.
Alternative 3 would not relocate and preserve historically important structures from the San
Luis Ranch Complex, which is a project objective. As a result, the City finds that Alternative
3 would not satisfy the project objectives.
4. Finding: Alternative 4 (50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space) is environmentally superior to
the proposed Specific Plan because there would be fewer residential units on the site and a
reduced overall site footprint. The impacts from this alternative are similar to the proposed
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan in the areas of biological resources, cultural resources, hazards
and hazardous materials, land use/policy consistency, noise, and recreation. Alternative 4
would not reduce any of the project’s Class I impacts to a level below significance thresholds.
However, Alternative 4 would result in incrementally reduced impacts to several issue areas,
including air quality, GHG emissions, transportation, aesthetics, and agricultural resources.
Alternative 4 would not meet the project objectives to develop infill growth for the City and
create significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City. Alternative 4
would result in fewer total residential units than the proposed project (536 vs. 580), and with
less housing overall, would be inferior to the proposed project in terms of its ability to provide
infill growth and create a variety of housing types, including affordable housing, which the
City has identified as a priority. Alternative 4 would also provide approximately one-third
less commercial square footage than the project, and would be inferior to the proposed project
in terms of its ability to provide new commercial office opportunities that will compliment
existing businesses in downtown San Luis Obispo, which is a project objective. As a result,
the City finds that Alternative 4 would not satisfy the project objectives.
Packet Pg. 300
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
71
SECTION 8. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. INTRODUCTION
The Final EIR for the project identifies the following significant and unavoidable impacts of the
project:
1. The project would be inconsistent with the SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan because it
would result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that would exceed the rate of
population growth.
2. The project is inconsistent with the 2001 Clean Air Plan, which SLOAPCD guidance states
is a cumulative air quality impact.
3. The project would result in the relocation, demolition, and removal of structures on the
San Luis Ranch property which are individually identified as historic resources. In
addition, the project would eliminate the San Luis Ranch Complex, which is eligible for
listing as a historic resource. Relocation, demolition, and/or removal of these historic
resources would permanently alter the historic context of the project site and on-site
structures.
4. Removal of the San Luis Ranch Complex would contribute to the cumulative loss of
historic resources in the City.
5. The project would be potentially inconsistent with adopted City policies in the General
Plan designed to protect historical resources and ensure adequate multimodal
transportation levels of service.
6. Temporary construction activity would create noise that could exceed City of San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code regulations, and mitigation may not be feasible to reduce the
impact to less than the applicable threshold.
7. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections
would operate at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted
multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would
reduce impacts at seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at
the Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersections would be significant and unavoidable.
8. Under Existing and Near-Term Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 19 study
area intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 18 of
these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Los Osos Valley Road
& Froom Ranch Way intersection would be significant and unavoidable.
9. Under Existing and Near-Term conditions four study area segment groups would operate
at unacceptable automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS based on adopted
multimodal level of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would
reduce impacts at three of these segment groups to an acceptable level. However, impacts
at Higuera Street roadway segments would be significant and unavoidable.
10. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions nine study area intersections would operate at
unacceptable automobile, bicycle, or pedestrian LOS based on adopted multimodal level
of service standards during AM and PM peak hours. Mitigation would reduce impacts at
seven of these intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna
Packet Pg. 301
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
72
Road & Dalidio Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would
be significant and unavoidable.
11. Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, the volume of traffic at 18 study area
intersections would exceed lane capacities. Mitigation would reduce impacts at 17 of these
intersections to an acceptable level. However, impacts at the Madonna Road & Dalidio
Drive and Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way intersections would be significant
and unavoidable.
For projects which would result in significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided,
CEQA requires that the lead agency balance the benefits of these projects against the unavoidable
environmental risks in determining whether to approve the projects. If the benefits of these
projects outweigh the unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered acceptable (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires that, before adopting such projects, the public
agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons why the agency
finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant environmental effects caused by the
project. This statement is provided below.
B. REQUIRED FINDINGS
The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures into the project. Although these
measures will lessen the unavoidable impacts listed above, the measures will not fully avoid these
impacts.
The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project and has determined
that none of these alternatives is feasible, environmentally superior, and would satisfy the project
objectives to the same or greater extent as the project.
Alternative 1 would avoid all of the significant impacts of the project, but would not achieve the
City’s objectives for the project and is not considered feasible. Alternative 2 is considered to be
environmentally inferior to the proposed project. Alternative 3 would be environmentally
superior to the project in some aspects, but would result in greater impacts to transportation, and
would not achieve City objectives for the project, including implementing a walkable-bikeable
neighborhood design integrated with public transit and open space amenities and developing an
agriculture heritage facilities & learning center. Alternative 4 is superior to the proposed project
in that it incrementally reduces impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, transportation, aesthetics,
and agricultural resources. However, Alternative 4 is inferior to the proposed project in terms of
its ability to achieve City objectives for the project, including developing infill growth for the City
and creating significant entry-level, workforce housing opportunities within the City.
In preparing this Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has balanced the benefits of
the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks. For the reasons specified
below, the City finds that the following considerations outweigh the proposed project’s
unavoidable environmental risks:
1. Provision of new Residential and Commercial Uses. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan will
develop a new residential neighborhood that fulfills a portion of the City’s unmet housing
Packet Pg. 302
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
73
needs and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to
provide for the convenience of area residents, consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.3.6,
3.3.1, and 8.1.4.
2. Provision of a Variety of Housing Types for all Income Levels. The San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan provides a variety of housing types and costs to meet the needs of renters and buyers
with a variety of income-levels, including inclusionary affordable housing for residents with
moderate, low, and very-low income levels, consistent with General Plan Land Use Element
Goal 2, Affordability.
3. Open Space and Agricultural Protection: Implementation of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
would preserve approximately 53 acres of the site in agriculture adjacent to the San Luis
Obispo City Farm, including development of the agricultural heritage facilities & learning
center, which would relocate and preserve historically important structures from the San Luis
Ranch Complex and integrate them into an enhanced and inter-connected, working
agricultural setting. The project would also preserve approximately 7.4 acres of the site in
open space.
4. Provision of Park and Recreational Facilities. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan will provide
a variety of park and recreational facilities for residents of the City, such as parks, trails and
other recreational facilities, and passive recreational opportunities within open space, both by
constructing facilities on site and providing needed funding for enhancement of existing
offsite City park and recreational facilities.
5. Well-Planned Neighborhood Would Reduce Per-Capita Vehicle Trips: The San Luis Ranch
Specific Plan would develop a new residential neighborhood to meet the City’s housing needs
and that designates sufficient land for neighborhood serving commercial uses to reduce
vehicle trips and provide for the convenience of area residents. In addition, the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan encourages the use of bicycles and walking within the Plan Area by
including specific policies and development standards that will result in subdivision and
building designs that facilitate bike use and pedestrian access and incorporating multiple
classes of bike lanes and including bike and pedestrian paths through the parks and open
space areas.
6. Provision of New Jobs: The project would create new construction-related and permanent
jobs in the project area. Planned commercial development would provide jobs in close
proximity to housing, consistent with Community Goal 34 in the General Plan Land Use
Element and Land Use Element Policy 1.5, which states that the gap between housing demand
and supply should not increase.
7. Transient Occupancy Tax: Development of commercial hotel uses would contribute
Transient Occupancy Tax revenues that help fund needed City services.
8. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the Community Rating System (CRS)
Rating Improvement: The proposed significant dedication of acreage for designated Natural
Beneficial Functions (CRS Activity 420) would improve the City’s point total with the CRS
point system. The City has improved its CRS rating steadily from a Class 10 community to a
Packet Pg. 303
14
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan
City of San Luis Obispo July 2017
74
Class 6 community. The improvement in class is directly related to a reduction in flood
insurance premiums citywide.
9. Implementation of the General Plan: As required by the City General Plan, the San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan contains policies and standards that will facilitate appropriate
development of land, protection of open space, and provision of adequate public facilities
consistent with the City’s recent LUCE update and the housing and transportation objectives.
Accordingly, the City finds that the project’s adverse, unavoidable environmental impacts are
outweighed by these considerable benefits.
Dated: __________________, 2017
Heidi Harmon
Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
Packet Pg. 304
14
Advisory Body Review Summary and Project Responses
The proposed Specific Plan now includes revisions from the version of the Plan that formed the
basis of the Project Description in the Draft EIR. The revisions are in response to advisory body
input and incorporates EIR mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts. The updated
Plan includes more refined details, including additional environmental protections, provisions
and regulations to reduce environmental impacts identified in the EIR for the Project.
The changes associated with the updated Specific Plan that respond to EIR mitigation measures
are included in Appendix B of the Specific Plan. The most substantial of these address the
following issues:
• Relocation of historical structures
• Construction vehicle access and activities
• Transportation improvements, primarily to City streets
• Agricultural conservation, including offsite mitigation
• Dust control measures
• Biological resource mitigation, including for habitat restoration and tree replacement
• Storm water pollution prevention, and approaches to onsite grading practices
• Noise reduction and mitigation through design
Below, staff has provided a brief summary of the main points discussed in each advisory body
meeting and the resulting main project changes, along with a summary of each meeting:
Planning Commission (PC)
• In order to have a broader mix of densities so there can be a greater variety of product
and affordability, the plan was revised from NG-1 (which encompassed the single family
and small lot areas) to NG 10 and NG 23, which are now separate zones. The NG-23
zone reflects a higher density to allow a variety of very small lot products. The SP
illustrates front and rear yard loaded units, both attached and detached.
• Cul-de-sacs have been avoided to the extent possible. The plan has been revised to have
only 2 cul-de-sacs in the single family, each with a connection to Froom Ranch. There is
one cul-de-sac in the multifamily, with a pedestrian connection to the rest of the project.
• Road and infrastructure phasing and timing specifically the overpass and interchange has
been updated.
The Planning Commission has previously considered the project on eight occasions, once during
the pre-application process, twice to review a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, twice
during the Draft EIR public review period, and three times to consider the project now before the
City Council. On June 7, 2017, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the
City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project entitlements, included the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of its Resolution, the Planning Commission
recommended additional modifications to the Specific Plan which are included in the City
Packet Pg. 305
14
Council Resolution.
Previous Planning Commission meetings, hearings, and workshops are summarized below:
• February 12, 2014. The Planning Commission held a pre-application review of materials
related to the project, providing direction to the project applicant that became the basis
for the August 2015 Draft Specific Plan, which was examined in the EIR for the project.
• February 10, 2016. The Planning Commission received a presentation regarding an
overview of a Specific Plan, and provided conceptual input to the applicant regarding the
first four chapters of the plan, focusing on land use, neighborhood form, agriculture, open
space and parks. No formal action was taken at that time.
• March 23, 2016. The Planning Commission received a presentation regarding an
overview of a Specific Plan, and provided conceptual input to the applicant regarding the
remaining chapters of the plan, focusing on circulation and infrastructure issues. No
formal action was taken at that time.
• January 11, 2017. The Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Draft EIR,
taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for considerati on in the
Final EIR.
• January 25, 2017. The Planning Commission held a second public workshop on the
Draft EIR, taking public testimony on the document, and providing input for
consideration in the Final EIR.
• May 24, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related
entitlements, and took public testimony.
• May 25, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related
entitlements, took further public testimony, and provided input to staff and the applicant
regarding the project. The Commission was primarily focused on the Final EIR, Specific
Plan, and General Plan Amendment.
• June 7, 2017. The Planning Commission considered the proposed project and related
entitlements, primarily focused on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related
conditions. After taking further public testimony, the Commission unanimously
recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and approve all project
entitlements, included the Vesting Tentative Tract Map as conditioned. As part of the
Resolution, the Planning Commission recommended additional modifications to the
Specific Plan.
Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)
• The committee preferred the development of a crossing of Highway 101 at Prado Road
even if it is for bicycle only for overall bicycling facility network connectivity. The
Prado Road overcrossing will contain bike paths on both sides of the bridge.
Previous Bicycle Advisory Committee meetings are summarized below:
Packet Pg. 306
14
• November 19, 2015. The BAC reviewed a preliminary version of the Specific Plan, and
provided comments on the bicycle planning provisions included in the document.
• January 19, 2017. The BAC provided comments on the updated bicycle planning
aspects of the Specific Plan that responded to previous input received in November
2015. The BAC conceptually concurred with the Specific Plan as presented. This
review occurred during the public comment period of the Draft EIR, but the BAC did
not have any substantive comment that related to the adequacy of the Draft EIR analysis.
Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)
• In order to incorporate additional passive recreational opportunities (i.e. trails) on-site,
the site contains a 6’ wide trail that follows the San Luis Channel and Perfumo Creek. It
winds through sections of preserved area for monarch butterflies.
• The Specific Plan has been revised from a Park/Open Space zoning designation to just
Open Space. As a result, the Open Space area will have a less manicured and more
natural look and feel.
The previous Parks and Recreation Commission meeting is summarized below:
• February 3, 2016. The PRC reviewed the proposed parks and recreation components of
the draft Specific Plan, and provided comments on these aspects of the project. As a
result of this review, the Specific Plan was modified to more clearly differentiate and
describe the various park facilities included in the project. The PRC also determined
that any shortfall in required onsite parks acreage would be most effectively addressed
through payment of in-lieu fees, which could be applied to areas that might more
appropriately serve the greater community.
Cultural Heritage Committee
• The conceptual Agricultural Heritage Center site plan revised to more accurately convey
the number and location of buildings.
• The updated plan provides more detail with regards to the relocation and rehabilitation
of historic structures.
• Three major buildings will be preserved through relocation and rehabilitation, not two as
originally proposed. Following CHC comments on the Draft EIR, the plan was revised
to include the preservation of the Main Barn, which was one of the individually
significant buildings in the historic complex.
January 23, 2017. The CHC conducted a public hearing to review the cultural resource
evaluation in the Draft EIR. The hearing provided an opportunity for members of the Committee
and the public to receive a summary presentation of the project as well as the major findings of
Packet Pg. 307
14
the Draft EIR related to cultural and historical resources. As a result of CHC input, and b ecause
the project already proposed to construct a new barn in the project’s proposed Agricultural Heritage
and Learning Center using salvageable materials from the historically significant main barn,
Mitigation Measure CR-1(a) was modified for the Final EIR to incorporate the main barn.
May 15, 2017. The CHC considered the applicant’s revised and updated approach to addressing
impacts to the historic San Luis Ranch complex, based on previous CHC input and direction from
the Final EIR. The CHC found the project consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance and historic preservation policies of the General Plan.
Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
• Revisions to design guidelines based on Commission input have been made to address
internal inconsistencies, clarify design standards, provide better illustrations, and make
the document more user-friendly.
November 16, 2015. The Draft Specific Plan Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) were
reviewed by the ARC. At that time, the ARC provided the applicant direction on the structure
and content of the design guidelines, architectural styles, and neighborhood form.
May 1, 2017. The applicant team addressed ARC concerns raised in November 2015 in an
updated version of the Design Guidelines. ARC provided additional comments to ensure internal
consistency of the text and photographic examples provided, as well as other key direction to
improve the long-term utility of the Design Guidelines. The applicant team is revising the
document, which is Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan, to address these concerns. This chapter will
be conceptually considered at an ARC workshop on May 22, then again on June 5 , when it will
make a formal recommendation on this information to the City Council.
May 22, 2017. The applicant team conceptually addressed ARC concerns raised on May 1, and
took further input from the ARC in a workshop format.
June 5, 2017. The ARC reviewed the revised Design Guidelines, which incorporated input
received at previous meetings. The ARC unanimously recommended approval of the project
Design Guidelines (Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan) to the City Council.
Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) (to ensure consistency with safety, density, overflight,
and noise policies):
• Delineation of 200’ no build zone affecting commercial areas
• A change of approximately 3 acres of residential NG-23 zoning to General Commercial
• 27 units removed from Sb-1 zone with 8 units relocated to the S-2 zone
• ALUC findings of consistency have been incorporated into Appendix C of the Specific
Plan
February 15, 2017. The ALUC continued the consideration of the item to its March 29, 2017
meeting, in order to allow the applicant to update the airport safety provisions of the Specific
Plan to achieve consistency with the ALUP.
March 29, 2017. The ALUC reviewed the project as updated, and provided additional direction
to the applicant to address potential ALUP inconsistency issues.
Packet Pg. 308
14
April 19, 2017. The ALUC reviewed the project, and determined that the project was consistent
with the ALUP, with conditions related to relocating 27 dwelling units that would have
otherwise been in a more restrictive airport safety zone, and by requiring a portion of the
designated commercial area be restricted from having developed structures). The applicant
subsequently updated the Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract map to address these
changes, which is the version of the project currently being considered by the City Council.
These changes did not affect the analysis or conclusions of the Final EIR.
Packet Pg. 309
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section summarizes the characteristics of the proposed San Luis Ranch Project, alternatives
to the project, as well as environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and residual impacts
associated with the project.
PROJECT SYNOPSIS
Lead Agency
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Contact:
Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
John Rickenbach, AICP, Project Manager
Project Proponent
Coastal Community Builders
c/o Marshall Ochylski (Project Representative)
979 Osos, Suite F7
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
P.O. Box 13
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
Project Description
The San Luis Ranch Project consists of a Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment/Pre-Zoning,
and Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Tract Map for a 131-acre project site, including
annexation of the site into the City of San Luis Obispo. It would also address a Development
Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding, which provides a mechanism for project
implementation. The project is intended to be consistent with the development parameters
described in the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted in December 2014). The
project includes construction of up to 580 residential units, 150,000 square feet of commercial
development, 100,000 square feet of office development, and a 200-room hotel, with a portion of
the site preserved for agriculture and open space uses. The project is planned to be constructed
in six phases, beginning in 2017.
The specific location and characteristics of the project are described in greater detail in Section
2.0, Project Description.
ALTERNATIVES
As required by Section 15126(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, this EIR examines a range of
reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly achieve similar objectives. This
includes the following four alternatives:
Packet Pg. 310
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-2
• Alternative 1: No Project, No Development
• Alternative 2: No Project, Measure J Entitlements
• Alternative 3: Historical Resource Preservation
• Alternative 4: 50% On-Site Agriculture/Open Space
Alternative 1 assumes that the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is not adopted, that none of the
proposed entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City, and that no further
development would occur on the project site.
Alternative 2 also assumes that the Specific Plan is not adopted and that none of the proposed
entitlements are implemented, including annexation to the City. However, this alternative
represents a project that would be processed by San Luis Obispo County, and considers what
would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future based on current plans and
consistency with available infrastructure and community services. There are existing
entitlements on the project site for development in the County from the voter-approved
initiative known as “Measure J,” which include 60 multi-family dwelling units, 560,000 square
feet of regional commercial and outdoor sales areas, 198,000 square feet of office space, a 150-
room hotel and ancillary facilities. Because the Measure J entitlements would leave the project
site under the jurisdiction of the County, but surrounded entirely by the City limit, these
entitlements would also require the use of private water from onsite wells and an onsite
wastewater treatment facility. Since this alternative (Alternative 2) assumes that the project site
would be developed under an existing entitlement, this alternative would not require
environmental review under CEQA.
Alternative 3 would preserve the San Luis Ranch Complex, as well as associated eucalyptus
trees, located in the northwest portion of the project site would be retained, and assumes that
the proposed multi-family residential development would be relocated and integrated into the
proposed single-family residential development area on the central portion of the project site.
By preserving the San Luis Ranch Complex, this alternative would avoid the project’s
significant and unavoidable impact to historic resources. In addition, this alternative would
also reduce other potential environmental impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, noise,
biological resources, land use/policy consistency, and hydrology and water quality, while
resulting in slightly increased impacts to transportation.
Alternative 4 would retain 50 percent of the net site acreage as on-site agricultural and open
space uses to be consistent on-site with the City’s General Plan Land Use Element Policy 8.1.4.f.
This alternative would retain the portion of land designated for commercial uses (NC)
southeast of Froom Ranch Way and southwest of Prado Road in agriculture. This alternative
would reduce the portion of the site available for residential and commercial development on
the project site.
The No Project, No Development Alternative (Alternative 1) would have the fewest
environmental impacts. However, since this is a “No Project” alternative, CEQA requires that a
separate alternative also be identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Because
Alternative 3 would avoid the significant and unavoidable impact to historic resources
identified for the project, as well as reducing other potential environmental effects due to the
preservation of the eucalyptus grove in the northwest portion of the project site along Madonna
Road, and due to the reduced overall development footprint this alternative is identified as the
environmentally superior alternative over other alternatives.
Packet Pg. 311
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-3
The complete alternatives analysis is included in Section 6.0, Alternatives.
AREAS OF CONCERN
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15123(b)(2), this EIR acknowledges the areas of
controversy and issues to be resolved which are known to the City of San Luis Obispo or were
raised during the scoping process. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared and circulated
for a 30-day public review period that began on October 26, 2015 and ended November 24,
2015. Several comment letters from public agencies and members of the public were received in
response to the NOP. The NOP and Initial Study, and NOP comment letters are included in
Appendix A of this EIR.
Primary environmental areas of concern raised by the commenting agencies and public include:
AREA OF CONCERN EIR SECTION
Access to U.S. Highway 101 Section 4.12: Transportation
Drainage characteristics, hydrology, flooding, and other impacts
associated with the area floodplain
Section 4.8: Hydrology and Water
Quality
Aviation Safety and airport/aviation hazards Section 4.7: Hazards,
Section 4.9: Land Use/Policy
Consistency
Construction equipment regulation and permit requirements associated
with air pollution emissions
Section 4.3: Air Quality
Existing structure demolition and potential to encounter asbestos
containing materials
Section 4.7: Hazards
Naturally occurring asbestos exposure Section 4.3: Air Quality
Operational permit requirements associated with air pollutant emissions Section 4.3: Air Quality
Long-term and short-term air quality impacts Section 4.3: Air Quality
Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions Section 4.6: Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Alternatives to the project Section 6.0: Alternatives
Routing plans relative to access to site and nearby land uses Section 4.12: Transportation
Residential displacement Section 4.9: Land Use/Policy
Consistency,
Section 4.14: Issues Addressed in
the Initial Study
FINAL EIR ERRATA
In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Draft EIR was circulated for a
52-day public review period that began December 9, 2016 and concluded on January 31, 2017.
Each written and verbal comment that the City received is included in Section 8.0, Responses to
Comments. Responses to these comments have been prepared to address the environmental
concerns raised by the commenters and to indicate where and how the Draft EIR addresses
pertinent environmental issues. The Draft EIR and responses to comments collectively comprise
the Final EIR for the project.
The responses to comments summarize the comment and direct the commenter to the section of
the Draft EIR that addresses their comment. In some cases, revisions have been made to the
Packet Pg. 312
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-4
Draft EIR to clarify information, data, or intent, or to make minor typographical corrections or
minor working changes. Any changes made to the text of the Draft EIR to are noted in the Final
EIR as changes from the Draft EIR. Where a comment results in a change to the Draft EIR text, a
notation is made in the response indicating that the text is revised. Changes in the Draft EIR
text are signified by strikeouts where text is removed and by underline font where text is
added. If text is added where the font is already bold or underlined, additions are noted using
underlined bold font. Mitigation measures in the Draft EIR that were revised as part of the
responses to comments are listed below. Revisions to these mitigation measures are also shown
in Table ES-1, applicable sections of the Draft EIR, and in Section 8.0, Responses to Comments.
• AG-1. Agricultural Conservation.
• AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures.
• AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment.
• AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan.
• AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures.
• BIO-1(e). Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization.
• BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and Minimization.
• BIO-2(b). Tree Replacement.
• CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan.
• HAZ-5(a). Groundwater Assessment for Contamination at Untested Wells.
• HAZ-5(b). Groundwater Remediation.
• HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls.
• N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier.
• N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction.
• N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier.
• N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel.
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Tables ES-1 through ES-3 provide a summary of the potential environmental impacts of the
project. The mitigation measures associated with each impact, which are to be implemented in
order to reduce the environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible, are also
summarized therein. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the tables identify the
following types of potential impacts associated with the project:
Packet Pg. 313
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-5
• Class I, Significant and Unavoidable: An impact that cannot be reduced to below the
threshold level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an
impact requires a ‘Statement of Overriding Considerations’ to be issued if the project is
approved per §15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
• Class II, Significant but Mitigable: An impact that can be reduced to below the threshold
level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact
requires ‘Findings’ to be made under §15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
• Class III, Not Significant: An impact that may be adverse, but does not exceed the
threshold levels and does not require mitigation measures. However, mitigation
measures that could further lessen the environmental effect may be suggested if readily
available and easily achievable.
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The project would result in twelve significant and unavoidable (Class I) impacts. Issue areas
with Class I impacts include air quality (Clean Air Plan consistency and cumulative air quality
impacts), cultural resources (historic resources and cumulative historic resources), land
use/policy consistency (General Plan policy consistency), noise (construction noise), and
transportation (existing and near-term intersection operations, existing and near-term lane
capacities, existing and near-term segment operations, cumulative intersection operations,
cumulative lane capacities, and cumulative segment operations).
Packet Pg. 314
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-6
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-1. The project would
be inconsistent with the
SLOAPCD 2001 Clean Air Plan
because it would result in an
increase in vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) that would
exceed the rate of population
growth. This impact would be
Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
AQ-1. Encourage Telecommuting. The project applicant or developers of
individual projects within the Specific Plan Area shall include provisions to
encourage employers within the proposed commercial, office, and hotel
components of the project to implement telecommuting programs and include
teleconferencing capabilities, such as web cams or satellite linkage, which will allow
employees to attend meetings remotely without requiring them to travel out of the
area.
Mitigation is not available that
would reduce projected VMT such
that the project’s vehicle trip rate
increase would not exceed
population growth in the region.
Therefore, impacts related to
consistency with the 2001 CAP
would remain significant and
unavoidable.
Cumulative Air Quality
Impacts. The project is
inconsistent with the 2001 CAP
and would exceed SLOAPCD
construction and operational
thresholds. As such, cumulative
impacts on air quality would be
Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
No additional mitigation is available to address cumulative air quality impacts. Cumulative air quality impacts
would remain significant and
unavoidable.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CR-1. The project would
result in the relocation,
demolition, and removal of
structures on the San Luis
Ranch property which are
individually identified as historic
resources. In addition, the
project would eliminate the San
Luis Ranch Complex, which is
eligible for listing as a historic
resource. Relocation,
demolition, and/or removal of
these historic resources would
permanently alter the historic
context of the project site and
on-site structures. This impact
CR-1(a). Historical Structure Relocation and Reconstruction Plan. In order to
implement Specific Plan Policy 2.5, a relocation and reconstruction plan for the
former spectator’s barn/viewing stand, and main residence, and main barn shall be
developed by a qualified historic architect. The plan shall include a
structural/architectural report documenting existing integrity and conditions and
include detailed treatment methods and measures to ensure that historic integrity is
retained and that all identified character defining features will be preserved.
CR-1(b). Archival Documentation of Historic Buildings. The applicant shall
provide archival documentation of the San Luis Ranch Complex in as-built and as-
found condition in the form of an Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level II
documentation. The documentation shall comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation (NPS 1990), and shall
include large-format photographic recordation, detailed historic narrative report, and
compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a
qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
The removal and/or demolition of
the historically significant main barn
and the relocation, demolition, and
removal of other structures in the
San Luis Ranch Complex would
change the historic context of the
San Luis Ranch property.
Furthermore, mitigation would not
avoid the removal of the main barn,
despite the proposed reuse of
salvageable materials from the
structure to the greatest extent
possible in the construction of a
new barn in the project’s proposed
Agricultural Heritage and Learning
Center. Therefore, the potential
Packet Pg. 315
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-7
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
would be Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or Architectural History (NPS
1983). The original archival-quality documentation shall be offered as donated
material to the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. Archival copies of the
documentation shall also be submitted to the San Luis Obispo County Library.
CR-1(c). Informational Display of Historic Resources. A retrospective interpretive
display detailing the history of the San Luis Ranch Complex and the project site, its
significance, and its important details and features shall be developed by the
applicant. The information should be incorporated into a publicly-accessed building
on the project site, such as the proposed Agricultural Heritage Facilities and
Learning Center, or a publicly-accessed outdoor location. The display shall include
images and details from the HABS documentation described in Mitigation Measure
CR-1(b) and any collected research pertaining to the historic property. The content
shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for History and/or
Architectural History (NPS 1983).
impact to the San Luis Ranch
Complex and the main barn
individually would remain significant
and unavoidable despite
implementation of the required
mitigation.
Cumulative Cultural
Resources Impacts. The
project would result in a
significant and unavoidable
impact associated with the
removal, relocation, or
reconstruction of individually
historic structures that are part
of the historically significant San
Luis Ranch Complex. As such,
the project would contribute to
the cumulative loss of historic
resources in the City. Therefore,
the project would result in a
Class I, significant and
unavoidable, cumulative impact
to historical resources.
No additional mitigation is available to address cumulative cultural resources
impacts.
Cumulative cultural resources
impacts would remain significant
and unavoidable.
LAND USE
Impact LU-1. The project would
be potentially inconsistent with
adopted City policies in the
General Plan designed to
The following Mitigation Measures would apply to this impact:
• Section 4.1, Aesthetics: AES-1(a) and AES-1(b)
• Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3
• Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a)
Specific Plan conflicts with Land
Use Element Policy 1.10.4 (Design
Standards), Land Use Element
Policy 8.1.4 (SP-2, San Luis Ranch
Packet Pg. 316
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-8
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
protect historical resources, and
ensure provision of parkland.
This would be a Class I,
significant and unavoidable,
impact.
through BIO-2(c)
• Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c)
• Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, HAZ-5(a), HAZ-5(b),
HAZ-6
• Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-
5(d)
• Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a)
through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g),
T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c)
• Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3
(Dalidio) Specific Plan Area), and
Conservation and Open Space
Element Policy 3.3.2 (Demolitions)
would remain potentially
inconsistent. The City
acknowledges the importance and
breadth of the potential
inconsistencies associated with the
Specific Plan by finding them to be
Class I, significant and unavoidable
impacts.
NOISE
Impact N-1. Temporary
construction activity would
create noise that could exceed
City of San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code regulations.
Mitigation is available to address
construction noise, but it may
not be feasible to reduce the
impact to less than the
applicable threshold. Impacts
would be Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
N-1(a). Construction Vehicle Travel Route. Construction vehicles and haul trucks
shall utilize roadways which avoid residential neighborhoods and sensitive
receptors where possible. The applicant shall submit a proposed construction
vehicle and hauling route for City review and approval prior to grading/building
permit issuance. The approved construction vehicle and hauling route shall be used
for soil hauling trips prior to construction as well as for the duration of construction.
N-1(b). Construction Activity Timing. Except for emergency repair of public
service utilities, or where an exception is issued by the Community Development
Department, no operation of tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration, or demolition work shall occur daily between the hours of 7:00 PM and
7:00 AM, or any time on Sundays, holidays, or after sunset, such that the sound
creates a noise disturbance that exceeds 75 dBA for single family residential, 80
dBA for multi-family residential, and 85 dBA for mixed residential/commercial land
uses across a residential or commercial property line.
N-1(c). Construction Equipment Best Management Practices (BMPs). For all
construction activity at the project site, noise attenuation techniques shall be
employed to ensure that noise levels are maintained within levels allowed by the
City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control). Such
techniques shall include:
• Sound blankets on noise-generating equipment.
• Stationary construction equipment that generates noise levels above 65 dBA at
the project boundaries shall be shielded with barriers that meet a sound
transmission class (a rating of how well noise barriers attenuate sound) of 25.
• All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be
Mitigation Measures N-1(a) through
N-1(g) require implementation of
noise reduction devices and
techniques during construction, and
would reduce noise associated with
on- and off-site construction activity
to the maximum extent feasible.
Noise from trucks can reach up to
88 dBA at 50 feet from the source.
Although Mitigation Measure N-1(a)
would reduce impacts from haul
trucks by requiring the haul route to
avoid residential areas and noise
sensitive uses where possible, haul
truck noise would continue to
exceed the 75 dBA threshold for
intermittent noise. Therefore, noise
impacts from haul trucks would be
minimized, but not eliminated. As a
result, temporary noise impacts
associated with off-site construction
activity would be significant and
unavoidable.
Packet Pg. 317
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-9
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
equipped with factory-recommended mufflers.
• For stationary equipment, the applicant shall designate equipment areas with
appropriate acoustic shielding on building and grading plans. Equipment and
shielding shall be installed prior to construction and remain in the designated
location throughout construction activities.
• Electrical power shall be used to power air compressors and similar power
tools.
• The movement of construction-related vehicles, with the exception of
passenger vehicles, along roadways adjacent to sensitive receptors shall be
limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Monday through Saturday.
No movement of heavy equipment shall occur on Sundays or official holidays
(e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day).
• Temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between construction sites and
affected uses.
TRANSPORTATION
Impact T-1. Under Existing and
Near-Term Plus Project
conditions nine study area
intersections would operate at
unacceptable automobile,
bicycle, or pedestrian LOS
based on adopted multimodal
level of service standards during
AM and PM peak hours.
Mitigation would reduce impacts
at seven of these intersections
to an acceptable level. However,
impacts at the Madonna Road &
Dalidio Drive and Los Osos
Valley Road & Froom Ranch
Way intersections would be
Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
T-1(a) Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
• City optimize signal timing to accommodate increased project volumes
(ongoing)
T-1(b) Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road.
• Extend existing westbound left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road to 310’ (Phase 1)
• Install 2nd westbound 310’ left turn lane on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1)
• Install eastbound 250’ right turn pocket on Madonna Road to Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road (Phase 1)
• Install 2nd northbound left shared with through-lane on Prado Road/Dalidio
Drive to Madonna Road (Phase 1)
• Prohibit westbound U-turns on Madonna Road (Phase 1)
• Provide split phase operations & optimize signal timing (Phase 1)
T-1(c) Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass-Only, Phase 2)
T-1(d) Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street.
• Optimize Signal Timing
Potential right-of-way constraints at
Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and
Los Osos Valley Road & Froom
Ranch Way may reduce the
feasibility of mitigation at these
intersections. Accordingly, some of
the potential impacts associated
with multimodal level of service
standards identified for Existing and
Near-Term Plus Project conditions
may not be feasibly mitigated to a
less than significant level. As a
result, impacts associated with
multimodal level of service
standards at these intersections
under Existing and Near-Term Plus
Project conditions would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
Packet Pg. 318
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-10
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
T-1(e) Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
• Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road northbound
Froom Ranch Way approach to northbound Froom Ranch Way Los Osos
Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road southbound Froom Ranch Way
approach to southbound Froom Ranch Way Los Osos Valley Road to 110’
(with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to
eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
T-1(f) Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way.
• Signalization (Phase 1)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-1(g) Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only Phase 2)
• Extend northbound right turn pocket to 230’ and channelize movement (Phase
1)
T-1(h) Intersection #21: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & Froom Ranch Way.
• Install multilane roundabout control (when connection is constructed)
T-1(i) Intersection #25: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive & SC Project Driveway.
• Install multilane roundabout control or restricted access (when connection is
constructed)
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
overpass/interchange would include
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Impact T-2. Under Existing and
Near-Term Plus Project
conditions, the volume of traffic
at 19 study area intersections
would exceed lane capacities.
Mitigation would reduce impacts
at 18 of these intersections to an
T-2(a) Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(b) Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(c) Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 S.B Ramps.
Potential right-of-way constraints at
Los Osos Valley Road & Froom
Ranch Way may reduce the
feasibility of mitigation at this
intersection. Accordingly, some of
the potential impacts associated
with lane capacities identified for
Packet Pg. 319
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-11
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
acceptable level. However,
impacts at the Los Osos Valley
Road & Froom Ranch Way
intersection would be Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
• Extend northbound Madonna Road left turn lane to 150’ (Phase 1)
T-2(d) Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(e) Intersection #7: Madonna Road & Higuera Street.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Plus U.S. 101 northbound ramps,
Phase 2)
T-2(f) Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
• Install dedicated 230’ right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to
northbound Froom Ranch Way (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
• Extend right turn lane on Los Osos Valley Road approach to southbound
Froom Ranch Way to 110’ (with Froom Ranch Way Bridge construction)
• Install 2nd southbound left turn lane on Froom Ranch Way approach to
eastbound Los Osos Valley Road (with Froom Ranch Way bridge construction)
T-2(g) Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound
Ramps.
• Extend off-ramp left turn pocket to 320’ (Phase 1)
T-2(h) Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
T-2(i) Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & Higuera Street.
• Extend eastbound right turn lane to 180’ (Phase 1)
T-2(j) Intersection #18: Prado Road & Higuera Street.
• Install 2nd U.S. 101 northbound left turn lane (Phase 1)
• Extend westbound right turn pocket to 400’ (Phase 1)
Existing and Near-Term Plus
Project conditions may not be
feasibly mitigated to a less than
significant level. As a result,
impacts to lane capacities at this
intersection under Existing and
Near-Term Plus Project conditions
would remain significant and
unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
Packet Pg. 320
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-12
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
overpass/interchange would include
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Impact T-3. Under Existing and
Near-Term conditions four study
area segment groups would
operate at unacceptable
automobile, bicycle, pedestrian,
and transit LOS based on
adopted multimodal level of
service standards during AM
and PM peak hours. Mitigation
would reduce impacts at three of
these segment groups to an
acceptable level. However,
impacts at Higuera Street
roadway segments would be
Class I, significant and
unavoidable
T-3(a) Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Los Osos Valley Road to Higuera
Street)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass Only, Phase 2)
• Fund assessment of decreasing transit headways to 25 min
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
T-3(b) Segments #7 - #8: Higuera Street (Madonna Road to Prado Road)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps,
Phase 2)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 1)
T-3(c) Segments #13 - #17: Los Osos Valley Road (Madonna Road to
Higuera Street)
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass and U.S. 101 northbound ramps,
Phase 2)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (Phase 3)
T-3(d) Segments #18 - #20: Dalidio Drive/Prado Road (Froom Ranch Way to
Higuera Street)
• Construct parallel Class I multiuse paths or bike boulevard (when Prado Road
is constructed/improved)
Implementation of the identified
mitigation measures would improve
LOS at all impacted study area
roadway segments to acceptable
levels, and impacts on these
facilities under Existing and Near-
Term Plus Project conditions would
be less than significant after
mitigation. However, potential right-
of-way constraints along Higuera
Street (Segments #7 and #8) may
reduce the feasibility of mitigation
along these segments. Accordingly,
some of the potential impacts
associated with multimodal level of
service standards identified for
Existing and Near-Term Plus
Project conditions may not be
feasibly mitigated to a less than
significant level. As a result,
impacts associated with multimodal
level of service standards at these
roadway segments under Existing
and Near-Term Plus Project
conditions would remain significant
and unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
Packet Pg. 321
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-13
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
overpass/interchange would include
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Impact T-8. Under Cumulative
Plus Project conditions nine
study area intersections would
operate at unacceptable
automobile, bicycle, or
pedestrian LOS based on
adopted multimodal level of
service standards during AM
and PM peak hours. Mitigation
T-8(a). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive/Prado Road.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
T-8(b). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[e]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f])
T-8(c). Intersection #10: Los Osos Valley Road & Auto Park Way.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f])
Potential right-of-way constraints at
Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and
Los Osos Valley Road & Froom
Ranch Way may reduce the
feasibility of mitigation at these
intersections. Accordingly, some of
the potential impacts associated
with multimodal level of service
standards identified for Cumulative
Packet Pg. 322
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-14
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
would reduce impacts at seven
of these intersections to an
acceptable level. However,
impacts at the Madonna Road &
Dalidio Drive and Los Osos
Valley Road & Froom Ranch
Way intersections would be
Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
T-8(d). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-8(e). Intersection #13: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-8(f). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-8(g). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[f])
Plus Project conditions may not be
feasibly mitigated to a less than
significant level. As a result,
impacts associated with multimodal
level of service standards at these
intersections under Cumulative
Plus Project conditions would
remain significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
overpass/interchange would include
Packet Pg. 323
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-15
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Impact T-9. Under Cumulative
Plus Project conditions, the
volume of traffic at 18 study area
intersections would exceed lane
capacities. Mitigation would
reduce impacts at 18 of these
intersections to an acceptable
level. Mitigation would reduce
impacts at 17 of these
intersections to an acceptable
level. However, impacts at the
Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive
and Los Osos Valley Road &
Froom Ranch Way intersections
would be Class I, significant and
unavoidable.
T-9(a). Intersection #1: Madonna Road & Los Osos Valley Road.
• Extend northbound right turn pocket on Los Osos Valley Road to 295’
• Extend southbound left turn pocket on Madonna Road to 395’
T-9(b). Intersection #2: Madonna Road & Oceanaire Drive.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
• Extend westbound right turn land on Madonna Road to 200’
T-9(c). Intersection #3: Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[b])
T-9(d). Intersection #4: Madonna Road & El Mercado.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measures T-1[b])
T-9(e). Intersection #5: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-9(f). Intersection #6: Madonna Road & U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-9(g). Intersection #8: Higuera Street & South Street.
• Extend northbound Higuera Street left turn pocket to 120’
• Extend eastbound South Street right turn pocket to 100’
T-9(h). Intersection #9: Los Osos Valley Road & Froom Ranch Way.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-
1[d]/Mitigation Measure T-2[f])
T-9(i). Intersection #11: Los Osos Valley Road & Calle Joaquin.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
Potential right-of-way constraints at
Madonna Road & Dalidio Drive and
Los Osos Valley Road & Froom
Ranch Way may reduce the
feasibility of mitigation at these
intersections. Accordingly, some of
the potential impacts associated
with lane capacities identified for
Cumulative Plus Project conditions
may not be feasibly mitigated to a
less than significant level. As a
result, impacts to lane capacities at
these intersections under
Cumulative Plus Project conditions
would remain significant and
unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
Packet Pg. 324
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-16
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
southbound ramps)
T-9(j). Intersection #12: Los Osos Valley Road & U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-9(k). Intersection #14: Los Osos Valley Road & S. Higuera Street.
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-9(l). Intersection #16: S. Higuera Street & Tank Farm Road.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-1[g])
T-9(m). Intersection #18: Higuera Street & Prado Road.
• Existing & Near-Term Plus Project Mitigation (Mitigation Measure T-2[j])
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
overpass/interchange would include
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Impact T-10. Under Cumulative
Plus Project conditions five
study area segment groups, as
well as mainline segments of
U.S. 101, would operate at
unacceptable automobile,
bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
LOS based on adopted
multimodal level of service
standards during AM and PM
peak hours. Mitigation would
reduce impacts at each of the
five study area segment groups
to an acceptable level. However,
impacts at the mainline
segments of U.S. 101 at Los
Osos Valley Road and Madonna
Road would be Class I,
significant and unavoidable.
T-10(a). Segments #1 - #6: Madonna Road (Higuera Street to Los Osos Valley
Road).
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-10(b). Segments #15 - #16: Los Osos Valley Road (Calle Joaquin to U.S. 101
Northbound Ramps).
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
T-10(c). Segment #24: Prado Road/Dalidio Drive (Project Driveway to Froom
Ranch Way).
• Construct Prado Road Overpass (Overpass with U.S. 101 northbound and
southbound ramps)
Potential impacts identified for the
northbound and southbound lanes
of the mainline segments of U.S.
101 at Los Osos Valley Road and
Madonna Road under Cumulative
Plus Project conditions would not
be mitigated to a less than
significant level. As a result,
impacts under Cumulative Plus
Project conditions would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Implementation of mitigation
measures that require off-site
improvements would generally not
result in significant residual
impacts, as these improvements
would occur within existing roadway
rights-of-way, or within urbanized
paved/landscaped areas
Packet Pg. 325
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-17
Table ES-1
Class I, Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measures Residual Impact
immediately adjacent to existing
roadway rights-of-way. The primary
exception to this is the Prado
Road/U.S 101
overpass/interchange. During
construction of the overpass,
northbound ramps, and southbound
ramps, potential issue areas that
may be temporarily affected would
include air quality, cultural
resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, water quality, noise and
transportation. Construction-related
environmental impacts would be
mitigated through compliance with
City and Caltrans permitting and
construction monitoring
requirements and standard
SLOAPCD dust and diesel
emission control measures. Long-
term impacts of the Prado
Road/U.S. 101
overpass/interchange would include
potential obstruction of scenic
views, loss of prime agricultural
land west of U.S. 101, and land use
impacts associated with acquisition
of additional right-of-way.
Packet Pg. 326
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-18
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact AG-1. The project would
result in the direct conversion of
59.356 acres of Prime
Farmland, as mapped by the
FMMP, to non-agricultural uses.
Therefore, impacts would be
Class II, significant but
mitigable.
AG-1. Agricultural Conservation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits the
project proponent shall provide that for every one (1) acre of Important Farmland
(Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) on the
site that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of project
development, one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity shall be
preserved in perpetuity. The land dedicated to agriculture pursuant to this measure
shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working
agricultural operation. The acreage required to meet the 1:1 ratio may be met by the
off-site agricultural conservation easement/deed restriction proposed by the project
applicant, as long as this land meets the conditions outlined in this measure. Said
mitigation shall be satisfied by the applicant through:
1) Granting a perpetual conservation easement(s), deed restriction(s), or
other farmland conservation mechanism(s) to the City or qualifying entity
which has been approved by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of
San Luis Obispo, for the purpose of permanently preserving agricultural
land. The required easement(s) area or deed restriction(s) shall therefore
total a minimum of 59.356 acres of Prime Farmland. The land covered by
said on- and/or off-site easement(s) or deed restriction(s) shall be located
within or contiguous to the City’s Urban Reserve Line or Greenbelt subject
to review and approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager; or
2) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved
by the City, such as the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo, to be
applied toward the future purchase of a minimum of 59.356 acres of Prime
Farmland in San Luis Obispo County, together with an endowment amount
as may be required. The payment amount shall be determined by the
qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or
3) Making an in-lieu payment to a qualifying entity which has been approved
by the City and that is organized for conservation purposes, to be applied
toward a future perpetual conservation easement, deed restriction, or other
farmland conservation mechanism to preserve a minimum of 59.356 acres
of Prime Farmland in San Luis Obispo County. The amount of the payment
shall be determined by the qualifying entity or a licensed appraiser; or
4) Any combination of the above.
W ith implementation of Mitigation
Measure AG-1, this impact would
be reduced to a less than
significant level.
Impact AG-3. The project would
include development of
commercial and residential uses
adjacent to agricultural uses on
AG-3(a). Agricultural Conflict Avoidance Measures. The following language shall
be added to Section 4.2.1, Agricultural Buffer, of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan:
Agricultural buffers will include City-approved measures to reduce availability of
W ith implementation of Mitigation
Measures AG-3(a) through AG-3(c)
this impact would be reduced to a
less than significant level.
Packet Pg. 327
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-19
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
the project site. This may result
in conflict with existing or future
urban and agricultural zoning
and uses and adversely affect
the long-term viability of the
remaining agricultural uses
onsite and at the adjacent SLO
City Farm. However, with
implementation of agricultural
buffers, and compliance with
standard APCD dust control
measures and City policies, this
impact would be Class II,
significant but mitigable.
public access to agricultural cultivation areas adjacent to the project site (e.g.,
fencing, signs, etc.). Future residents will be notified of agricultural buffers as
part of purchase or lease agreements.
AG-3(b). Agricultural Fencing. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City
to fund installation of fencing and signs along Froom Ranch Way and Dalidio
Drive/Prado Road to minimize potential for increases in trespass and vandalism of
adjacent agricultural areas.
AG-3(c). Buffer Landscaping. To reduce the potential for noise, dust, and
pesticide drift to affect future residents on the project site, the project applicant shall
ensure that project landscape plans include planting of a windrow of trees and
shrubs within the agricultural buffer along Froom Ranch Way at a sufficient density
to buffer the site from surrounding agricultural operations.
AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-2. Construction of
the project would generate
temporary increases in localized
air pollutant emissions.
Construction emissions of ROG,
NOX, and DPM would exceed
SLOAPCD construction
thresholds. Impacts would be
Class II, less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
AQ-2(a). Fugitive Dust Control Measures. Construction projects shall implement
the following dust control measures so as to reduce PM10 emissions in accordance
with SLOAPCD requirements.
• Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
• Water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used during construction in sufficient
quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering
frequency shall be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed
(non-potable) water or a SLOAPCD-approved dust suppressant shall be used
whenever possible;, to reduce the amount of potable water used for dust
control;
• All dirt stock pile areas shall be sprayed daily as needed;
• Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible
following completion of any soil disturbing activities;
• Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than
one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-
invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
• All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the SLOAPCD;
• All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as
soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
According to the SLOAPCD CEQA
Air Quality Handbook, if estimated
construction emissions are
expected to exceed either of the
SLOAPCD Quarterly Tier 2
thresholds of significance after the
standard and BACT measures are
factored into the estimation, then an
SLOAPCD approved Construction
Activity Management Plan (CAMP)
and offsite mitigation need to be
implemented in order to reduce
potential air quality impacts to a
less than significant level. If
construction emissions do not
exceed Tier 2 thresholds with
implementation of standard and
BACT measures, SLOAPCD
considers emissions less than
significant, even if Tier 1 thresholds
continue to be exceeded. Table
4.3-7 shows mitigated construction
emissions with implementation of
Packet Pg. 328
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-20
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
• Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance
between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle
Code Section 23114;
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto
streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used
where feasible;
• All of these fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and
building plans; and
• The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the
fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20
percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall
include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The
name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the
SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or
demolition.
AQ-2(b). Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment. The following
standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction
activities at the project site:
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s
specifications;
• Fuel all off-road and portable diesel powered equipment with ARB certified
motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for sue off-road);
• Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB’s Tier 2 certified engines or
cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road
Regulation;
• Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the ARB’s 2007 or cleaner
certification standard for on-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with
the State On-Road Regulation;
• Construction or trucking companies with fleets that do not have engines in their
fleet that meet the engine standards identified in the above two measures (e.g.
captive or NOX exempt area fleets) may be eligible by proving alternative
compliance;
Tier 3 off-road engine compliance
and level 2 diesel particulate filters
required by Mitigation Measure AQ-
2(c), as well as low VOC-emission
paint required by Mitigation
Measure AQ-2(d). As shown
therein, with implementation of
Mitigation Measures AQ-2(c) and
AQ-2(d) construction emissions
would not exceed either of the
SLOAPCD Quarterly Tier 2
thresholds of significance.
Therefore, implementation of a
CAMP and offsite mitigation is not
required and impacts would be less
than significant with mitigation.
Packet Pg. 329
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-21
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
• On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the
California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled
commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than
10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California
and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that
drivers of said vehicles:
1. Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5-minutes
at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and,
2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a
heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during
sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any
location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in
Subsection (d) of the regulation.
• Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction
identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use
Off-Road Diesel regulation.
• All on and off-road diesel equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes.
Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job sites to
remind drivers and operators of the 5 minute idling limit;
• In addition to the state required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant
shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to
nearby sensitive receptors:
1. Signs that specify the no idling areas shall be posted and enforced at the
site.
2. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors is not permitted;
3. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors;
4. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended;
• Electrify equipment when feasible;
• Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, where
feasible; and
• Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site where feasible, such as
compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or
biodiesel.
AQ-2(c). Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Construction
Equipment. The following BACT for diesel-fueled construction equipment shall be
implemented during construction activities at the project site, where feasible:
• Further reducing emissions by expanding use of Tier 3 and Tier 4 off-road and
Packet Pg. 330
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-22
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
2010 on-road compliant engines where feasible;
• Repowering equipment with the cleanest engines available; and
• Installing California Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies, such as level 2
diesel particulate filters. These strategies are listed at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm
AQ-2(d). Architectural Coating. To reduce ROG and NOX levels during the
architectural coating phase, low or no VOC-emission paint shall be used with levels
of 50 g/L or less.
AQ-2(e). Construction Activity Management Plan. Emissions reduction measures
and construction practices required to comply with Mitigation Measures AQ-2(a)
through AQ-2(d) shall be documented in a Construction Activity Management Plan
(CAMP) and submitted to SLOAPCD for review and approval at least three months
before the start of construction. The CAMP shall include a Dust Control
Management Plan, tabulation of on and off-road construction equipment (age,
horse-power and miles and/or hours of operation), construction truck trip schedule,
construction work-day period, and construction phasing. If implementation of the
Standard Mitigation and Best Available Control Technology measures cannot bring
the project below the Tier 1 threshold (2.5 tons of NOX+ROG per quarter), off-site
mitigation shall be implemented in coordination with SLOAPCD to reduce NOX and
ROG emissions to below the Tier 1 threshold.
Impact AQ-3. Operation of the
project would generate air
pollutant emissions on an
ongoing daily and annual basis.
The project’s daily emissions
would exceed SLOAPCD daily
emissions thresholds, but would
not exceed annual thresholds.
Implementation of SLOAPCD’s
standard mitigation measures
and off-site mitigation would
reduce emissions to a less than
significant level. Impacts would
be Class II, less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
AQ-3(a). Standard Operational Mitigation Measures. Prior to issuance of grading
permits, the applicant shall define and incorporate into the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan standard emission reduction measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality
Handbook to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. Emission reduction
measures may shall include, but would not be limited to:
• Prohibit residential wood burning appliances;
• Install a ‘Park and Ride’ lot with bike lockers in a location of need defined by
SLOCOG;
• Trusses for south-facing portions of roofs shall be designed to handle dead
weight loads of standard solar-heated water and photovoltaic panels. Roof
design shall include sufficient south facing roof surface, based on structures
size and use, to accommodate adequate solar panels. For south facing roof
pitches, the closest standard roof pitch to the ideal average solar exposure
shall be used;
• Increase the building energy rating by 20 percent above 2013 Title 24
requirements (used in the California Emissions Estimator Model) or consistent
Implementation of the measures
identified in Mitigation Measure AQ-
3(a) and AQ-3(b) would reduce
impacts to regional air quality. For
informational purposes, Table 4.3-
11 and Table 4.3-12 show
anticipated project emissions with
incorporation of measures
achieving a 20 percent exceedance
of Title 24 requirements and a
prohibition on residential wood
burning devices, which are
quantifiable in CalEEMod. As
shown in Table 4.3-11 and Table
4.3-12, implementation of these
measures alone would not reduce
daily operational emissions of
Packet Pg. 331
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-23
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
with 2016 Title 24 requirements, whichever is stricter. Measures used to reach
the 20 percent rating cannot be double counted;
• Design building to include roof overhangs that are sufficient to block the high
summer sun, but not the lower winter sun, from penetrating south facing
windows (passive solar design);
• Utilize high efficiency gas or solar water heaters;
• Install door sweeps and weather stripping (if more efficient doors and windows
are not available);
• Install energy-reducing programmable thermostats;
• Participate in and implement available energy-efficient rebate programs
including air conditioning, gas heating, refrigeration, and lighting programs;
• Use roofing material with a solar reflectance values meeting the U.S. EPA/DOE
Energy Star® rating to reduce summer cooling needs.
• Utilize onsite renewable energy systems (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, low-
impact hydro, biomass and bio-gas); and
• Provide and require the use of battery powered or electric landscape
maintenance equipment for new development;
• Provide a display case or kiosk displaying transportation information in a
prominent area accessible to employees or residents;
• Provide neighborhood electric vehicles/ car share program;
• Provide bicycle-share program;.
• Provide bicycle lockers for ‘Park and Ride’ lots;
• Provide vanpool, shuttle, mini bus service (alternative fueled preferred);
• Provide free-access telework terminals and/or wi-fi access in multi-family
projects.
In addition, the proposed hotel component of the Specific Plan shall participate in
the SLO Car Free Program, provide incentives to car-free travelers, and promote
the program in their communication tools.
AQ-3(b). Off-Site Mitigation. If implementation of standard emission reduction
measures from the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook described in Mitigation
Measure AQ-3(a) is insufficient to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels,
then the applicant shall coordinate with SLOAPCD to provide funding for off-site
emission reduction measures to reduce emissions to below daily threshold levels. In
accordance with SLOAPCD methodology, the excess emissions shall be multiplied
by the cost effectiveness of mitigation as defined in the State’s current Carl Moyer
Incentive Program Guidelines to determine the annual off-site mitigation amount.
This amount shall then be extrapolated over the life of the project to determine total
ROG, NOX, DPM, or dust to below
SLOAPCD’s daily significance
thresholds. However, with
implementation of Mitigation
Measures AQ-3(a), Standard
Operational Mitigation Measures,
and AQ-3(b), Off-Site Mitigation,
annual emissions would be reduced
below SLOAPCD’s annual
operational thresholds. Therefore,
long-term operational impacts
would be less than significant.
Packet Pg. 332
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-24
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
off-site mitigation. Off-site emission reduction measures may include, but would not
be limited to:
• Developing or improving park-and-ride lots;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with SLOAPCD-approved wood
combustion devices;
• Retrofitting existing homes in the project area with energy-efficient devices;
• Constructing satellite worksites;
• Funding a program to buy and scrap older, higher emission passenger and
heavy-duty vehicles;
• Replacing/re-powering transit buses;
• Replacing/re-powering heavy-duty diesel school vehicles (i.e. bus, passenger
or maintenance vehicles);
• Funding an electric lawn and garden equipment exchange program;
• Retrofitting or re-powering heavy-duty construction equipment, or on-road
vehicles;
• Re-powering marine vessels;
• Re-powering or contributing to funding clean diesel locomotive main or auxiliary
engines;
• Installing bicycle racks on transit buses;
• Purchasing particulate filters or oxidation catalysts for local school buses,
transit buses or construction fleets;
• Installing or contributing to funding alternative fueling infrastructure (i.e. fueling
stations for CNG, LPG, conductive and inductive electric vehicle charging, etc.);
• Funding expansion of existing transit services;
• Funding public transit bus shelters;
• Subsidizing vanpool programs;
• Subsidizing transportation alternative incentive programs;
• Contributing to funding of new bike lanes;
• Installing bicycle storage facilities; and
• Providing assistance in the implementation of projects that are identified in City
or County Bicycle Master Plans.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1. Implementation
of the project could have a
substantial adverse effect on
candidate, sensitive, or special
status species that may occur
BIO-1(a). Best Management Practices. The applicant shall ensure the following
general wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for construction
activity within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area:
• No pets or firearms shall be allowed at the project site during construction
activities.
Implementation of BIO-1(a) through
BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to
listed, candidate or special-status
plant and wildlife species to a less
than significant level and ensure
Packet Pg. 333
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-25
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
on the project site. Impacts
would be Class II, potentially
significant but mitigable.
• All trash that may attract predators must be properly contained and removed
from the work site. All such debris and waste shall be picked up daily and
properly disposed of at an appropriate site.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles shall occur
at least 100 feet from Prefumo Creek and in a location where a spill would not
drain toward aquatic habitat. A plan must be in place for prompt and effective
response to any accidental spills prior to the onset of work activities. All
workers shall be informed of the appropriate measures to take should an
accidental spill occur.
• Pallets or secondary containment areas for chemicals, drums, or bagged
materials shall be provided. Should material spills occur, materials and/or
contaminants shall be cleaned from the project site and recycled or disposed of
to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
• Prior to construction activities in areas adjacent to Prefumo Creek and Cerro
San Luis Channel, the drainage features shall be fenced with orange
construction fencing and signed to prohibit entry of construction equipment and
personnel unless authorized by the City. Fencing should be located a minimum
of 20 feet from the edge of the riparian canopy or top of bank and shall be
maintained throughout the construction period for each phase of development.
Once all phases of construction in this area are complete, the fencing may be
removed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, appropriate
erosion control BMPs (e.g., use of coir rolls, jute netting, etc.) shall be
implemented to minimize adverse effects on Prefumo Creek. No plastic
monofilament netting shall be utilized on site.
• Construction equipment shall be inspected at the beginning of each day to
ensure that wildlife species have not climbed into wheel wells or under tracks
since the equipment was last parked. Any sensitive wildlife species found
during inspections shall be gently encouraged to leave the area by a qualified
biological monitor or otherwise trained personnel.
• All vehicles and equipment shall be in good working condition and free of leaks.
• Environmentally Sensitive Areas shall be delineated by a qualified biologist
prior to construction to confine access routes and construction areas.
• Construction work shall be restricted to daylight hours (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM) to
avoid impacts to nocturnal and crepuscular (dawn and dusk activity period)
species. No construction night lighting shall be permitted within 100 yards of
the top of the Prefumo Creek bank.
• Concrete truck and tool washout shall be limited to locations designated by a
qualified biologist such that no runoff will reach Prefumo Creek or Cerro San
that the project would comply with
COSE Policies 7.3.1, Protect Listed
Species, and 7.3.2, Species of
Local Concern.
Packet Pg. 334
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-26
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Luis Channel.
• All open trenches shall be constructed with appropriate exit ramps to allow
species that accidentally fall into a trench to escape. Trenches will remain open
for the shortest period necessary to complete required work.
• Existing facilities and disturbed areas shall be used to the extent possible to
minimize the amount of disturbance and all new access roads other than the
Froom Ranch Way Bridge shall be cited to avoid high quality habitat and
minimize habitat fragmentation.
• In the event that construction must occur within the creek or creek setback, a
biological monitor shall be present during all such activities with the authority to
stop or redirect work as needed to protect biological resources.
BIO-1(b). Worker Environmental Awareness Program Training. Prior to the
initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), the applicant
shall ensure all personnel associated with project construction attend a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training.
• The training shall be conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in
recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project area. The
specifics of this program shall include identification of the sensitive species and
habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological
characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction
and avoidance measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources
within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be
prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel
involved with construction of the project. All employees shall sign a form
provided by the trainer documenting they have attended the WEAP and
understand the information presented to them.
BIO-1(c) . Western Pond Turtle and Two-Striped Garter Snake Impact
Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are
implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts to western pond turtle and
two-striped garter snake (these reptiles utilize similar habitats; therefore,
implementation of the proposed measures for western pond turtle are also suitable
and appropriate for two-striped garter snake):
• A qualified biologist(s) shall conduct a pre-construction survey within 24 hours
prior to the onset of work activities within and around areas that may serve as
potential western pond turtle habitat. If this species is found and the individuals
are likely to be injured or killed by work activities, the approved biologist shall
be allowed sufficient time to move them from the project site before work
Packet Pg. 335
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-27
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
activities begin. The biologist(s) must relocate the any western pond turtle the
shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat that is not
likely to be affected by activities associated with the project.
• Access routes, staging, and construction areas shall be limited to the minimum
area necessary to achieve the project goal and minimize potential impacts to
western pond turtle habitat including locating access routes and construction
staging areas outside of wetlands and riparian areas to the maximum extent
practicable.
BIO-1(d) . California Red-legged Frog, Western spadefoot, and Coast Range Newt
Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall implement the following to
avoid and minimize potential impacts to CRLF. Because coast range newt and
western spadefoot are amphibians that utilize similar habitats to CRLF,
implementation of the following measures provided for CRLF shall be implemented
for these species as well.
• Only USFWS-approved biologists shall participate in activities associated with
the capture, handling, and monitoring of CRLF.
• Ground disturbance shall not begin until written approval is received from the
USFWS that the biologist is qualified to conduct the work. If the USFWS does
not authorize the relocation of CRLF occurring within the project site, CRLF
found within the project site shall be avoided with a 100-foot buffer and no
activities shall occur within that buffer until the CRLF has left the project site on
its own.
• Areas of the project site that lie within 100 feet upland from riparian or
jurisdictional areas shall be surrounded by a solid temporary exclusion fence
(such as silt fencing) that shall extend at least three feet above the ground and
be buried into the ground at least 6 inches to exclude CRLF from the project
site. Plastic monofilament netting or other similar material will not be used. The
location of the fencing shall be determined by a qualified biologist. The fence
shall remain in place throughout construction activities. Installation of the
exclusion fencing shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to ensure that it is
installed correctly.
• During new grading activities in habitats within 100 feet upland from riparian or
jurisdictional areas, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to recover any
spadefoot toads that may be excavated/unearthed with native material or found
under vegetation. If the animals are in good health, they shall be immediately
relocated to a designated release area. If they are injured, the animals shall be
turned over to an approved wildlife rehabilitator until they are in a condition to
be released into the designated release area.
Packet Pg. 336
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-28
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
• To ensure that diseases are not conveyed between work sites by the approved
biologist, the fieldwork code of practice developed by the Declining Amphibian
Populations Task Force shall be followed at all times.
BIO-1(e) . Steelhead Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall
ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts
to steelhead:
• Before any activities begin on the project, a qualified biologist will conduct a
training session for all construction personnel. At a minimum, the training will
include a description of the steelhead and its habitat, the specific measures
that are being implemented to conserve this species for the project, and the
boundaries within which the project may be accomplished. Brochures, books,
and briefings may be used in the training session, provided that a qualified
person is on hand to answer any questions.
• During the duration of project activities, all trash that may attract predators will
be properly contained and secured, promptly removed from the work site, and
disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction debris
will be removed from the work areas.
• All refueling, maintenance, and staging of equipment and vehicles will occur at
least 100 feet from riparian habitat or bodies of water and in a location where a
potential spill would not drain directly toward aquatic habitat (e.g., on a slope
that drains away from the water source). The monitor shall ensure that
contamination of suitable habitat does not occur during such operations. Prior
to the onset of work activities, a plan must be in place for prompt and effective
response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the
importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should
an accidental spill occur.
• The number of access routes, size of staging areas, and the total area used for
construction activities shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to
achieve the project goals.
• The City will only permit work within the immediate vicinity of Prefumo Creek for
times of the year when potential impacts to steelhead would be minimal. Work
shall be restricted during the wet season (October 15 through April 30) and
should ideally occur during the late summer and early fall during the driest
portion of the year; however, water may still be present during construction. If
work is proposed in the streambed and water is present during construction, a
diversion will be required to dewater the work area and the following avoidance
and minimization measures will apply:
(1) Upstream and downstream passage for fish, including juvenile
Packet Pg. 337
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-29
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
steelhead, shall be provided through or around the construction site at
all times construction is occurring within the Prefumo Creek streambed.
(2) A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey and be
present onsite during the diversion installation and dewatering process
to capture and relocate any trapped steelhead and/or other fish. Upon
approval from the NMFS, the biologist(s) must relocate these individuals
the shortest distance possible to a location that contains suitable habitat
that is not likely to be affected by activities associated with the project.
(3) Dewatering operations shall employ a five millimeter mesh screen
fastened to the intake hose to exclude fish and other wildlife species
from the pump.
(4) Steelhead shall be excluded from the construction zone with block nets
installed upstream and downstream the of the bridge construction zone.
The distance upstream and downstream for block net installation will
depend on the type of construction activities occurring in the streambed.
• To control sedimentation during and after project implementation, the following
BMPs shall be implemented. If the BMPs are somehow ineffective, consultation
with the City and appropriate resource agencies will be undertaken, and all
attempts to remedy the situation will commence immediately.
(1) It shall be the owner’s/contractor’s responsibility to maintain control of
the entire construction operations and to keep the entire site in
compliance.
(2) The owner/contractor shall be responsible for monitoring erosion and
sediment control measures (including but not limited to fiber rolls, inlet
protections, silt fences, and gravel bags) prior, during and after storm
events, monitoring includes maintaining a file documenting onsite
inspections, problems encountered, corrective actions, and notes and a
map of remedial implementation measures.
(3) Erosion shall be controlled by covering stockpiled construction materials
(i.e. soil, spoils, aggregate, fly-ash, stucco, hydrated lime, etc.) All earth
stockpiles over 2.0 cubic yards that are not actively being used, shall be
covered with a tarp consistent with the applicable construction general
permit, or through other means of erosion control approved by the City
(e.g., and ringedsurrounding with straw bales or silt fencing). The site
shall be maintained to minimize sediment-laden runoff to any storm
drainage system including existing drainage swales and/or sand
watercourses.
(a) Construction operations shall be carried out in such a manner that
erosion and water pollution will be minimized.
Packet Pg. 338
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-30
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
(b) State and local laws concerning pollution abatement shall be
complied with.
(c) If grading operations are expected to denude slopes, the slopes
shall be protected with erosion control measures immediately
following grading on the slopes.
(4) Specifically, in order to prevent sedimentation and debris from entering
Prefumo Creek during construction, silt fencing shall be installed along
the top of the banks on the west side of the channel prior to the onset of
construction activities.
• The project biologist will monitor construction activities, in stream habitat, and
overall performance of BMPs and sediment controls for the purpose of
identifying and reconciling any condition that could adversely affect steelhead
or their habitat. The biologist will halt work if necessary and will recommend
site-specific measures to avoid adverse effects to steelhead and their habitat.
• Equipment will be checked daily for leaks prior to the initiation of construction
activities. A spill kit will be placed near the creek and will remain readily
available during construction in the event that any contaminant is accidentally
released.
• In addition to these avoidance and minimization measures, Mitigation Measure
BIO-2(a) would also ensure that potential temporary and permanent indirect
impacts to steelhead from the project are reduced as much as practicable.
BIO-1(f). Great Blue Heron and Monarch Butterfly Impact Avoidance and
Minimization. The applicant shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to
avoid and minimize potential impacts to overwintering monarch butterflies and
nesting great blue herons.
• Tree trimming/removal and construction activities that affect eucalyptus trees
near or within the monarch overwintering grove or active great blue heron nests
identified in the San Luis Ranch Monarch Trees Inspection Memo, Results of
2015 and 2016 San Luis Ranch Heron Rookery Surveys Memo, and San Luis
Ranch – Prefumo Creek Widening Biological Constraints Memo prepared by
Althouse and Meade (Appendix F), shall not be conducted during the monarch
butterfly overwintering season from October 1 through March 31 if monarch
butterflies are present, or while great blue heron nests are active from February
1 to August 31. If construction activities must be conducted during these
periods, a qualified biologist shall conduct overwintering monarch surveys
and/or nesting great blue heron surveys within one week of habitat disturbance.
If surveys do not locate clustering monarchs or nesting great blue herons,
construction activities may be conducted. If clustering monarchs and/or nesting
Packet Pg. 339
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-31
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
great blue herons are located, no construction activities shall occur within 100
feet of the edge of the overwintering grove and/or active nest(s) until the
qualified biologist determines that no more monarchs are overwintering in the
grove or the nest(s) are no longer active.
• A qualified biologist shall prepare and implement a habitat enhancement plan
prior to issuance of grading permits to enhance and restore overwintering and
nesting habitat that is to be preserved. The habitat enhancement plan shall
include native shrubs and trees such as Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis
macrocarpa) that may support heron roosting and monarch butterfly
overwintering. As eucalyptus trees senesce, they shall be replaced with native
species. Native trees and shrubs shall also be used to supplement gaps in
canopy or act as windbreaks.
• Create new offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons to mitigate for removal
of onsite nesting habitat. With a qualified biologist present, the current rookery
may be moved to a suitable offsite location where the same great blue herons
can resume nesting, following methods detailed in Crouch et al. (2002). It
should be noted that creating offsite nesting habitat for great blue herons is
experimental and that the relocation techniques described in Crouch et al.
(2002) were used to relocate black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax
nycticorax). In addition, an agreement with the City will be required prior to
implementation of the offsite strategy on their property. The methods detailed in
Crouch et al. (2002) include:
(a) This entails at least one year of pre-construction monitoring of the
rookery, where the timing of rookery activities will be noted: arrival of
breeding adults, egg laying, hatching, and fledging. During this time,
audio recordings of adults and juveniles shall be made.
(b) Following the completion of the nesting season in late summer, a
certified arborist specializing in the translocation of trees will examine
the mature trees onsite and work with the City’s Natural Resources
Manager to determine whether or not it is feasible to relocate the mature
trees containing nests the mature trees containing nests shall be boxed
and moved across Madonna Road to a suitable location at Laguna Lake
Open Space.
(c) Prior to the start of the next nesting season (based on timing of adult
arrival in previous years), nesting adults will be recruited to the new
location via decoys and playback of vocalizations. The new location will
be monitored regularly by a qualified biologist for the following three
breeding seasons.
BIO-1(g). Nesting Birds Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant shall
Packet Pg. 340
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-32
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential impacts
to nesting birds:
• For construction activities occurring during the nesting season (generally
February 1 to September 15), surveys for nesting birds covered by the
California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to vegetation
removal. The surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 500-foot buffer
around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be
conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified
biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species
and at least 300 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required
depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring
in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction
personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the
nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed
and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer.
• If feasible, removal of vegetation within suitable nesting bird habitats will be
scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1 and February
14), after fledging and before the initiation of the nesting season.
BIO-1(h) . Roosting Bats Impact Avoidance and Minimization. The applicant
shall ensure the following actions are undertaken to avoid and minimize potential
impacts to roosting bats:
• Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey
of existing structures within the project site to determine if roosting bats are
present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season
(November through March). The biologist shall have access to all interior attics,
as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys
shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of
roost (day, night, maternity, etc.) If the bats are not part of an active maternity
colony, passive exclusion measures may be implemented in close coordination
with CDFW. These exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow
bats to exit the structure but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the
structure.
• If a bat colony is excluded from the project site, appropriate alternate bat
habitat as determined by a qualified biologist shall be installed on the project
site or at an approved location offsite.
• Prior to removal of any trees over 20 inches diameter-at-breast-height (DBH), a
survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any of the
Packet Pg. 341
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-33
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
trees proposed for removal or trimming harbor sensitive bat species or
maternal bat colonies. If a non-maternal roost is found, the qualified biologist, in
close coordination with CDFW shall install one-way valves or other appropriate
passive relocation method. For each occupied roost removed, one bat box shall
be installed in similar habitat and should have similar cavity or crevices
properties to those which are removed, including access, ventilation,
dimensions, height above ground, and thermal conditions. Maternal bat
colonies may not be disturbed.
Impact BIO-2. Implementation
of the project would have a
substantial adverse effect on
sensitive habitats, including
riparian areas. Impacts would be
Class II, potentially significant
but mitigable.
BIO-2(a). Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be prepared which will provide a minimum 2:1 ratio
(replaced: removed) for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian habitat. The
HMMP will identify the specific mitigation sites and it will be implemented
immediately following project completion. The HMMP shall include, at a minimum,
the following components:
• Description of the project/impact site (i.e. location, responsible parties, areas to
be impacted by habitat type);
• Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to
be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and
values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or
preserved];
• Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size,
ownership status, existing functions and values of the compensatory mitigation
site);
• Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for
expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site
preparation, planting plan [including plant species to be used, container sizes,
seeding rates, etc.]);
• Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal
and irrigation as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule);
• Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than
quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions
and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or
preserved, annual monitoring reports);
• Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to
be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 80
percent relative cover by vegetation type;
• An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address negative
impacts to restoration efforts;
Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-2(a), BIO-
2(b), BIO-2(c), and BIO-3 would
reduce direct impacts to sensitive
habitats, including riparian areas,
by implementing construction
BMPs, including containing
construction activities, debris, and
sediment in appropriate locations
outside of sensitive habitat to the
maximum extent practicable, and
by providing compensatory
mitigation for permanently impacted
riparian habitat. In addition
Mitigation Measures HWQ-1(a) and
HWQ-1(b) include construction
management practices that would
reduce construction related impacts
to water quality. When combined
with standard regulatory measures
(including required permitting from
USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB), and
regulatory oversight during
construction by the Environmental
Monitor, implementation of required
mitigation measures would reduce
impacts to a less than significant
level and ensure that the project
would comply with applicable
General Plan policies for the
protection of habitat and other
Packet Pg. 342
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-34
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
• Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation;
and
• Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for
contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism).
BIO-2(b) . Tree Replacement. Riparian trees four inches or greater measured at
diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) shall be replaced in-kind at a minimum ratio of 3:1
(replaced: removed). Trees 24 inches or greater inches DBH shall be replaced in-
kind at a minimum ratio of 10:1. Willows and cottonwoods may be planted from live
stakes following guidelines provided in the California Salmonid Stream Habitat
Restoration Manual for planting dormant cuttings and container stock (CDFW
2010).
• Tree replacement shall be conducted in accordance with a Natural Habitat
Restoration and Enhancement Plan to be approved by the City’s Natural
Resource Manager.
• The Natural Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Plan shall prioritize the
planting of replacement trees on-site where feasible, but shall allow that
replacement trees may be planted off-site with approval of the City’s Natural
Resource Manager.
• Replacement trees may be planted in the fall or winter of the year in which
trees were removed. All replacement trees will be planted no more than one
year following the date upon which the native trees were removed.
BIO-2(c). Froom Ranch Way Bridge Design to Avoid Riparian Areas. The Froom
Ranch Way Bridge crossing footings shall be placed outside mapped riparian areas.
The placement of the bridge and footings shall be indicated on the Development
Plan, VTM, and HMMP, and shall show the bridge’s placement in relation to existing
vegetation and the bed and bank of Prefumo Creek.
biological resources.
Impact BIO-3. Construction of
the project could have a
substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. Impacts would
be Class II, potentially
significant but mitigable.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) and BIO-2(a) would reduce
impacts to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation is required.
Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1(a) andBIO-2(a
would reduce potential impacts to
federally protected wetlands, any
riparian habitat, or other sensitive
natural communities to a less than
significant level and ensure that the
project would be consistent with
COSE Policy 7.5.5.
Packet Pg. 343
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-35
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Impact BIO-4. Development of
the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan Area would not
permanently interfere with the
movement of resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors along
Prefumo Creek and through
open agricultural lands on the
project site. This impact would
be Class II, potentially
significant but mitigable.
Implementation of BIO-1(a) requires construction BMPs that would reduce potential
impacts to riparian habitat within the Prefumo Creek corridor. Implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-1(c), BIO-1(d), and BIO-1(e), would reduce impacts to
western pond turtle, CRLF, coast range newt, and steelhead by requiring pre-
construction surveys by qualified biological staff and construction worker training to
ensure individuals of these species are not impacts during project construction
activity within or adjacent to riparian and riverine habitat. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-1(f) would reduce impacts to heron rookeries by requiring
preconstruction surveys, mapping, exclusionary fencing, and offsite compensatory
mitigation. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to
birds by requiring construction monitoring for nesting birds, and requiring
appropriate buffers for construction activity in proximity to active nests.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1(h) would reduce impacts to bats
roosting in trees by requiring trees that may provide habitat for roosting bats to be
surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to removal. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-2(a) would reduce potential impacts to federally protected wetlands,
any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community to a less than significant
level.
Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1(a), BIO-1(c), BIO-
1(d), BIO-1(e), BIO-1(f), BIO-1-(h),
and BIO-2(a) would reduce
potential impacts to wildlife species,
wildlife nursery sites, riparian
corridors, and other sensitive
natural communities to a less than
significant level.
Cumulative Biological
Resources Impacts. Consistent
with the LUCE Update EIR, the
project would implement
mitigation measures to ensure
compliance with the applicable
goals and policies of the
General Plan. As a result, the
project’s contribution to this
cumulative impact would be
potentially significant but
mitigable.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a)
through BIO-2(c) would reduce cumulative impacts to biological resources to a less
than significant level.
Implementation of required
mitigation measures would reduce
cumulative impacts to a less than
significant level.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CR-2. Identified
archaeological resources on the
project site are ineligible for
listing in the CRHR and NRHP,
and disturbance of these
resources would not constitute a
significant impact. However, the
CR-2(a). Retain a Qualified Principal Investigator. In accordance with
Conservation and Open Space Policies 3.5.6 and 3.5.7, a qualified principal
investigator, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for professional archaeology (hereafter qualified archaeologist), shall be
retained to carry out all mitigation measures related to archaeological resources.
Monitoring shall involve inspection of subsurface construction disturbance at or in
Implementation of Mitigation
Measures CR-2(a) and CR-2(b)
would reduce impacts to
archaeological resources to a less
than significant level.
Packet Pg. 344
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-36
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
potential remains for the project
to result in impacts to previously
unidentified archaeological
resources. Therefore, this
impact would be Class II,
significant but mitigable.
the immediate vicinity of known sites, or at locations that may harbor buried
resources that were not identified on the site surface. A Native American monitor
shall also be present because the area is a culturally sensitive location. The
monitor(s) shall be on-site on a full-time basis during earthmoving activities,
including grading, trenching, vegetation removal, or other excavation activities.
CR-2(b). Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources. In the event
that archaeological resources are exposed during construction, all work shall be
halted in the vicinity of the archaeological discovery until a qualified archaeologist
can visit the site of discovery and assess the significance of the cultural resource. In
the event that any artifact or an unusual amount of bone or shell is encountered
during construction, work shall be immediately stopped and relocated to another
area. The lead agency shall stop construction within 100 feet of the exposed
resource until a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist can evaluate the find (see 36
CFR 800.11.1 and CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5[f]). Examples of such cultural
materials might include: ground stone tools such as mortars, bowls, pestles, and
manos; chipped stone tools such as projectile points or choppers; flakes of stone
not consistent with the immediate geology such as obsidian or fused shale; historic
trash pits containing bottles and/or ceramics; or structural remains. If the resources
are found to be significant, they must be avoided or will be mitigated consistent with
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Guidelines.
Packet Pg. 345
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-37
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-4. Hazardous
materials sites identified on and
upgradient to the project site as
well as residual pesticides and
agricultural chemicals in soil due
to historical use of pesticides
and other agricultural chemicals
onsite could create a hazard to
construction workers during the
construction phase of the
project. Impacts would be Class
II, significant but mitigable.
HAZ-4. Soil Sampling and Remediation. Prior to issuance of any grading permits,
a contaminated soil assessment shall be completed in the portions of land to be
graded for development. Soil samples shall be collected under the supervision of a
professional geologist or environmental professional to determine the presence or
absence of contaminated soil in these areas. The sampling density shall be in
accordance with guidance from San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health
Services, so as to define the volume of soil that may require remediation.
Laboratory analysis of soil samples shall be analyzed for the presence of
organochlorine pesticides, in accordance with EPA Test Method SW8081A, and
heavy metals in accordance with EPA Test Methods 6010B and 7471A. If soil
sampling indicates the presence of pesticides or heavy metals exceeding applicable
environmental screening levels, the soil assessment shall identify the volume of
contaminated soil to be excavated.
If concentrations of contaminants exceed EPA action levels and therefore warrant
remediation, contaminated materials shall be remediated either prior to concurrent
with construction and an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be prepared.
Cleanup may include excavation, disposal, bio-remediation, or any other treatment
of conditions subject to regulatory action. All necessary reports, regulations and
permits shall be followed to achieve cleanup of the site. The contaminated materials
shall be remediated under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed
to oversee such remediation and under the direction of the lead oversight agency.
The remediation program shall also be approved by a regulatory oversight agency,
such as the San Luis Obispo County Environmental Health Services, the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or DTSC. All proper waste handling and
disposal procedures shall be followed. Upon completion of the remediation, the
environmental consultant shall prepare a report summarizing the project, the
remediation approach implemented, and the analytical results after completion of
the remediation, including all waste disposal or treatment manifests.
With implementation of Mitigation
Measure HAZ-4, impacts related to
exposure to residual agricultural
chemicals would be reduced to a
less than significant level.
Impact HAZ-5.
Tetrachloroethene (also called
perchloroethylene, or PCE) has
been detected in the shallow
aquifer in concentrations that
exceed the Maximum
Contaminant Level (MCL) in
active irrigation wells on the
HAZ-5(a). Groundwater Assessment for Contamination at Untested Wells. Any
groundwater wells on the project site that would be used for agricultural irrigation
shall be sampled by a registered soils engineer or remediation specialist to
determine the presence or absence of regulated contaminants prior to issuance of
grading permits. This assessment shall target on-site PCE associated with off-site
dry cleaning operations.
HAZ-5(b). Groundwater Remediation. If groundwater sampling indicates the
W ith incorporation of these
mitigation measures, this impact
would be less than significant.
Packet Pg. 346
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-38
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
eastern portion of the site. As
future on-site residents or
workers could potentially be
exposed to PCE from irrigation
water, this would be a Class II,
significant but mitigable, impact.
presence of any contaminant in hazardous quantities, the project applicant (or
authorized agent thereof) shall contact the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) and Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) to determine the level of
any necessary remediation efforts. These may include:
• Installation of charcoal filtration into well-head systems at wells where PCE is
identified in hazardous quantities. After installation of charcoal filtration,
groundwater wells shall be re-sampled consistent with Mitigation Measure HAZ-
5(a).
• Groundwater remediation to contaminant concentrations below applicable
standards in compliance with applicable laws prior to issuance of grading
permits. A copy of the applicable remediation certification from Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or Department of Toxic Substances
(DTSC), or written confirmation that a certification is not required, shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department.
Impact HAZ-6. The project site
is located in an area where
geologic analysis for NOA is
required prior to grading and
could potentially result in
exposure of people to NOA
during grading and construction
activities. Therefore, this impact
would be Class II, significant but
mitigable.
HAZ-6. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Exposure Avoidance and Minimization:
a. Prior to earthwork activities, a site-specific health and safety plan shall be
developed per California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(CalOSHA) requirements. The plan shall include appropriate health and safety
measures if NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. All
construction workers that have the potential to come into contact with
contaminated soil/bedrock and groundwater shall be knowledgeable of the
requirements in the health and safety plan, which includes proper training and
personal protective equipment. The health and safety plan shall prescribe
appropriate respiratory protection for construction workers.
b. Prior to beginning construction, a soil and bedrock analysis for asbestos using
polarized light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy by a qualified
laboratory shall be conducted. Samples of soil shall be collected from multiple
locations across the site, and bedrock samples shall be collected from
locations where excavation into bedrock is anticipated. If NOA is detected,
appropriate regulations pertaining to excavation, removal, transportation, and
disposal of NOA shall be followed. The sampling strategy shall take into
account the locations of potential source areas, and the anticipated lateral and
vertical distribution of contaminants in soil and/or groundwater. The results of
the investigation shall be documented in a report that is signed by a California
Professional Geologist. The report shall include recommendations based upon
the findings for additional investigation/remediation if contaminants are
detected above applicable screening levels (e.g., excavate and dispose,
groundwater and/or soil vapor extraction, or in situ bioremediation).
With implementation of Mitigation
Measure HAZ-6, impacts related to
exposure to NOA would be reduced
to a less than significant level.
Packet Pg. 347
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-39
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
c. During earthwork activities, appropriate procedures shall be incorporated in the
event that NOA is detected in soil or bedrock beneath the project site. These
procedures shall be followed to eliminate or minimize construction worker or
general public exposure to potential contaminants in soil. Procedures shall
include efforts to control fugitive dust, contain and cover excavation debris
piles, appropriate laboratory analysis of soil for waste characterization, and
segregation of contaminated soil from uncontaminated soil. The applicable
regulations associated with excavation, removal, transportation, and disposal of
contaminated soil shall be followed (e.g., tarping of trucks and waste
manifesting). These procedures may be subject to San Luis Obispo APCD
requirements under the California ARB ATCM for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HWQ-1. During project
construction, the surface soil
would be subject to erosion and
the downstream watershed
would be subject to pollution.
The project’s impact on water
quality during construction would
be Class II, significant but
mitigable.
HWQ-1(a). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All required actions shall be
implemented pursuant to a SWPPP and SWMP to be prepared by the project
applicant and submitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board
under the NPDES Phase II program. At a minimum, the SWPPP/SWMP shall
including the following BMPs:
• The use of sandbags, straw bales, and temporary de-silting basins during
project grading and construction during the rainy season to prevent discharge
of sediment-laden runoff into stormwater facilities;
• Revegetation as soon as practicable after completion of grading to reduce
sediment transport during storms;
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the base of bare slopes
before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through April 15th);
• Installation of straw bales, wattles, or silt fencing at the project perimeter and in
front of storm drains before the onset of the rainy season (October 15th through
April 15th); and/or
• Alternative BMPs as approved by the RWQCB as part of the SWPPP submittal.
HWQ-1(b). Berms and Basins. As specified in the SWPPP, the applicant shall be
required to manage and control runoff by constructing temporary berms, sediment
basins, runoff diversions, or alternative BMP’s as approved by the RWQCB as part
of the SWPPP submittal, in order to avoid unnecessary siltation into local streams
during construction activities where grading and construction shall occur in the
vicinity of such streams.
• Berms and basins shall be constructed when grading commences and be
periodically inspected and maintained. The project applicant shall sufficiently
Implementation of the mitigation
measures and compliance with
existing regulations would ensure
that the potentially significant
construction runoff and associated
impacts to water quality would be
reduced to a less than significant
level.
Packet Pg. 348
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-40
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
document, to the CCRWQCB satisfaction, the proper installation of such berms
and basins during grading.
HWQ-1(c). Concept Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan. As specified in the
SWPPP and the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations, the applicant shall be
required to submit a Grading Plan and Master Drainage Plan to the Planning
Division and City Public Works Director for approval prior to approval of the VTTM.
The grading and drainage plans shall be designed to minimize erosion and water
quality impacts, to the extent feasible, and shall be consistent with the project’s
SWPPP. The plans shall include the following:
a. Graded areas shall be revegetated with deep-rooted, native, non-invasive
drought tolerant species to minimize slope failure and erosion potential.
Geotextile fabrics shall be used if necessary to hold slope soils until vegetation
is established;
b. Temporary storage of construction equipment shall be limited to a minimum of
100 feet away from drainages on the project site; and
c. Erosion control structures shall be installed.
d. Demonstrate peak flows and runoff for each phase of construction.
e. Be coordinated with habitat restoration efforts, including measures to minimize
removal of riparian and wetland habitats and trees (Mitigation Measures BIO-
2[a] and BIO-2[b]).
f. Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Division. The applicant shall ensure installation of erosion control
structures prior to beginning of construction of any structures, subject to review
and approval by the City.
Impact HWQ-3. During
operation, the proposed
residential, and commercial, and
agricultural uses would increase
the quantities of pollutants
associated with runoff and
sedimentation. The project’s
impact on water quality would be
Class II, significant but mitigable
impact.
HWQ-3(a). Stormwater Quality Treatment Controls. BMP devices shall be
incorporated into the stormwater quality system depicted in the Master Drainage
Plan (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-1[c]). The final design of the stormwater
quality system shall be reviewed and approved by the City.
The Master Drainage Plan shall contain the following relevant BMPs:
• Vegetated bioswales to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and
other pollutants along corridors of planted grasses.
• Vegetated buffer strips to reduce sediment and particulate forms of metals and
nutrients.
• Hydrodynamic separation products to reduce suspended solids greater than
240 microns, trash, and hydrocarbons. These hydrodynamic separators shall
be sized to handle peak flows from the project site consistent with applicable
regulatory standards.
Implementation of required
mitigation measures and
compliance with existing
regulations would ensure that the
potentially significant impacts to
water quality resulting from runoff
during operation of the project
would be reduced to a less than
significant level.
Packet Pg. 349
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-41
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
HWQ-3(b). Stormwater BMP Maintenance Manual. The project applicant shall
prepare a development maintenance manual for the stormwater quality system
BMPs (refer to Mitigation Measure HWQ-3[a]). The maintenance manual shall
include detailed procedures for maintenance and operations of all stormwater
facilities to ensure long-term operation and maintenance of post-construction
stormwater controls. The maintenance manual shall require that stormwater BMP
devices be inspected, cleaned, and maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer’s maintenance specifications. The manual shall require that devices
be cleaned prior to the onset of the rainy season (i.e., October 15th) and
immediately after the end of the rainy season (i.e., May 15th). The manual shall also
require that all devices be checked after major storm events.
HWQ-3(c). Stormwater BMP Semi-Annual Maintenance Report. The property
manager(s) or acceptable maintenance organization shall submit to the City of San
Luis Obispo Public Works Department a detailed report prepared by a licensed Civil
Engineer addressing the condition of all private stormwater facilities, BMPs, and any
necessary maintenance activities on a semi-annual basis (October 15th and May
15th of each year). The requirement for maintenance and report submittal shall be
recorded against the property.
Impact HWQ-4. Approximately
98 acres of the project site is
within the existing 100-year
flood zone. However, proposed
grading and elevation
modifications would ensure that
the project would not place
housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area or expose people or
structures downstream of the
Specific Plan Area to flood
hazards due to increased runoff
or loss of floodplain storage.
This impact would be Class II,
significant but mitigable.
HWQ-4. Conditional Letter of Map Revision/Letter of Map Revision. The
applicant, in conjunction with the City of San Luis Obispo, shall prepare the CLOMR
application and obtain a LOMR from FEMA.
Implementation of Mitigation
Measure HWQ-4 and compliance
with existing regulations would
ensure that this impact would be
reduced to a less than significant
level.
LAND USE
Impact LU-2. The Specific Plan
would be potentially consistent
with LAFCO policies for
Mitigation Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would ensure that the Specific Plan would not
result in conflicts between the San Luis Obispo LAFCO agricultural policies and the
Specific Plan.
Implementation of Mitigation
Measures AG-1 and AG-3 would
ensure that this impact would
Packet Pg. 350
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-42
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
annexation. This impact would
be Class II, less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
remain less than significant.
Cumulative Land Use Impacts.
The proposed uses are
consistent with the intent of the
goals and policies established
within the City’s General Plan
and Zoning Regulations after
implementation of mitigation,
and would not cumulatively
contribute to the loss of open
space or agricultural land
beyond that already anticipated
in the City’s LUCE Update and
EIR. Furthermore, the Specific
Plan is not expected to
cumulatively contribute to
potential airport noise and/or
safety issues. As such,
cumulative land use impacts
would be less than significant
with incorporation of the
mitigation included in this EIR.
The following Mitigation Measures would apply to this impact:
• Section 4.1, Aesthetics: AES-1(a) and AES-1(b)
• Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources: AG-1, AG-3
• Section 4.4, Biological Resources: BIO-1(a) through BIO-1(h) and BIO-2(a)
through BIO-2(c)
• Section 4.5, Cultural Resources: CR-1(a) through CR-1(c)
• Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: HAZ-4, HAZ-5(a), HAZ-5(b),
HAZ-6
• Section 4.10, Noise: N-1(a) through N-1(g), N-4(a), N-4(b), N-5(a) through N-
5(d)
• Section 4.12, Transportation and Circulation: T-1(a) through T-1(i), T-2(a)
through T-2(j), T-3(a) through T-3(d), T-4, T-5, T-6, T-7, T-8(a) through T-8(g),
T-9(a) through T-9(m), T-10(a) through T-10(c)
• Section 4.14, Issues Addressed in the Initial Study: GEO-1, GEO-3
This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
NOISE
Impact N-4. Future
development on the project site
would generate operational
noise typically associated with
residential, commercial, office,
and hotel development. Noise
from the project would not
exceed acceptable levels at
existing off-site sensitive
receptors. However, noise from
new on-site commercial uses
may exceed applicable City
standards at proposed on-site
N-4(a). HVAC Equipment. Retail HVAC equipment shall be shielded and located
on building rooftops, or a minimum of 100 feet from the nearest residential property
line.
N-4(b). Parking Lot/Loading Dock Orientation and Noise Barrier. Parking areas
and loading docks within the proposed retail areas shall be located a minimum of
100 feet from the property lines of the nearest residential properties. For parking
areas and loading docks located a minimum of 250 feet from the property line of
residential properties to the west, or for parking areas and loading docks located a
minimum of 150 feet from the property line of residential properties to the west with
a building intervening line-of-sight between the parking area/loading dock and the
residential property, no further mitigation would be required.
If parking areas or loading docks would be located closer to the within 250 feet of
This mitigation would ensure that
noise levels at residences on the
project site would not exceed the
City’s standards for intermittent
noise.
Packet Pg. 351
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-43
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
residences. This impact would
be Class II, less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
the residential properties to the west than described above, a masonry noise barrier
shall be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed residences adjacent
to the commercial land use area on the eastern portion of the project site. The noise
barrier shall be constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at
least three pounds per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps.
Impact N-5. Existing noise
sources near the project site
include vehicles on local
roadways and U.S. 101.
Development of the project
would expose future residents
on the project site to traffic noise
from local roadways and U.S.
101. With mitigation, traffic
noise levels on the project site
would not exceed City
standards. Therefore, this
impact would be Class II, less
than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
N-5(a). Interior Noise Reduction. The project applicant shall implement the
following measures, or similar combination of measures, which demonstrate that
interior noise levels in proposed residences adjacent to Froom Ranch Way and
Madonna Road, hotel, and offices would be reduced below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL
interior noise standard. The required interior noise reduction shall be achieved
through a combination of standard interior noise reduction techniques, which may
include (but are not limited to):
• In order for windows and doors to remain closed, mechanical ventilation such
as air conditioning shall be provided for all units (Passive ventilation may be
provided, if mechanical ventilation is not necessary to achieve interior noise
standards, as demonstrated by a qualified acoustical consultant).
• All exterior walls shall be constructed with a minimum STC rating of 50,
consisting of construction of 2 inch by 4 inch wood studs with one layer of 5/8
inch Type “X” gypsum board on each side of resilient channels on 24 inch
centers and 3 ½ inch fiberglass insulation.
• All windows and glass doors shall be rated STC 39 or higher such that the
noise reduction provided will satisfy the interior noise standard of 45 dBA
CNEL.
• An acoustical test report of all the sound-rated windows and doors shall be
provided to the City for review by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure
that the selected windows and doors in combination with wall assemblies would
reduce interior noise levels sufficiently to meet the City’s interior noise
standard.
• All vent ducts connecting interior spaces to the exterior (i.e., bathroom exhaust,
etc.) shall have at least two 90 degree turns in the duct.
• All windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner.
Sliding window panels shall form an air-tight seal when in the closed position
and the window frames shall be caulked to the wall opening around the
perimeter with a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound
infiltration. Exterior doors shall seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in
the closed position.
The applicant shall submit a report to the Community Development Department by a
qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific interior noise reduction
techniques included in residential, hotel, and office components of the project would
This mitigation would ensure that
traffic noise levels would not
exceed City standards.
Packet Pg. 352
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-44
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
achieve interior noise levels that would not exceed 45 dBA CNEL.
N-5(b). Residential Outdoor Activity Area Noise Attenuation. Outdoor activity
areas (e.g., patios and hotel pool areas) associated with shared multifamily
residential recreational spaces, hotel, commercial, and office uses shall be
protected from sound intrusion so that they meet the City’s exterior standard of 60
dBA CNEL. Outdoor activity areas shall be oriented away from traffic noise such
that intervening buildings reduce traffic noise or shall include noise barriers capable
of reducing traffic noise levels to meet the City’s exterior standard. Hotel pool areas
shall be located a minimum of 500 feet from the U.S. 101 right-of-way. Noise
barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, or
masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot,
and shall have no openings or gaps. The applicant shall submit a report to the
Community Development Department by a qualified acoustic consultant certifying
that the specific outdoor noise reduction techniques in combination with the
orientation of outdoor activity areas of shared multifamily residential recreational
spaces, hotel, commercial, and offices would achieve exterior noise levels that
would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
N-5(c). Froom Ranch Way Noise Barrier. A masonry noise barrier or alternative
barrier, such as a landscaped berm, shall be installed along the southern property
line of residential lots that abut Froom Ranch Way to protect outdoor activity areas
(patios and pools) at these residences from sound intrusion from traffic along Froom
Ranch Way. The noise barrier or berm shall provide, at minimum, a 6 foot high
barrier between Froom Ranch Way and the neighboring residences from the final
grade of whichever use (i.e., Froom Ranch Way or residences) has a higher final
elevation. If a masonry noise barrier is implemented, tThe noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds
per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is
used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development
Department by a qualified acoustical consultant certifying that the specific exterior
noise reduction techniques included would achieve exterior noise levels that would
not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
N-5(d). U.S. Highway 101 Noise Barrier at Hotel. If the hotel includes an outdoor
activity area (such as a patio or pool) a masonry noise barrier or alternative barrier,
such as berms, landscaping, or glass, must be installed along the eastern property
line of the hotel where it abuts the U.S. 101 right of way to protect these outdoor
activity areas from sound intrusion from traffic along U.S. 101. If a masonry noise
Packet Pg. 353
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-45
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
barrier is implemented, tThe noise barrier shall provide, at minimum, an 8 foot high
barrier between U.S. 101 and the hotel from the final grade of whichever use (i.e.,
U.S. 101 or hotel) has a higher final elevation. Such a The noise barrier shall be
constructed of any masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds
per square foot, and shall have no openings or gaps. If an alternative material is
used, the developer shall submit a report to the Community Development
Department by a qualified acoustical consultant demonstrating that the specific
exterior noise reduction techniques included in the hotel component of the project
would achieve exterior noise levels that would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL.
RECREATION
Impact REC-1. The project
would accommodate new
residents in the City of San Luis
Obispo who will use existing and
planned parks and recreation
facilities. Provision of on-site
parks and recreation facilities
would not meet the adopted City
parkland standard for the San
Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area.
Therefore, impacts to parks and
recreational facilities would be
Class II, potentially significant
but mitigable.
REC-1. Parkland In-lieu Fees. The project applicant shall pay parkland in-lieu fees
in accordance with the City’s parkland in-lieu fee program for the parkland shortage.
The project’s specific fee shall be determined by the City at the time of project
approval, after accounting for parkland provided within the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan Area. The in-lieu fees collected from the project shall be directed to new
projects or improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities within the City of
San Luis Obispo parks system.
With payment of the City’s required
parkland in-lieu fees to ensure
compliance with the policies and
performance standards in the City’s
General Plan as part of the project,
impacts associated with parks and
recreational facilities would be less
than significant.
Cumulative Recreation
Impacts. The project would not
meet the Citywide parkland
standards and would exacerbate
the exiting shortfall of parks and
recreational facilities within the
City. As a result, cumulative
adverse physical effects on the
environment from recreational
development would be
potentially significant, and the
project’s contribution to this
impact would be cumulatively
considerable.
With payment of the City’s required parkland in-lieu fees to ensure compliance with
the policies and performance standards in the City’s General Plan as part of the
project, required by Mitigation Measure REC-1, the project contribution to
cumulative impacts associated with parks and recreational facilities would be
reduced to a less than significant level.
Implementation of required
mitigation measures would reduce
cumulative impacts to a less than
significant level.
Packet Pg. 354
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-46
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
TRANSPORTATION
Impact T-4. Project construction
activities would create traffic
impacts due to construction
vehicles causing congestion and
deteriorating pavement
conditions. Mitigation would
reduce these impacts to an
acceptable level. This impact
would be Class II, less than
significant with mitigation.
T-4. Construction Traffic Management Plan. Prior to construction, a traffic
management plan shall be prepared for review and approval by the City of San Luis
Obispo Public Works Department. The traffic management plan shall be based on
the type of roadway traffic conditions, duration of construction, physical constraints,
nearness of the work zone to traffic and other facilities (bicycle, pedestrian,
driveway access, etc.). The traffic management plan shall include:
• Advertisement. The project developer shall prepare an advertisement campaign
informing the public of the proposed construction activities. Advertisements
shall occur prior to beginning work and periodically during the course of the
project construction. The advertising shall include notification of changes to bus
schedules and potential changes to bus stop locations, potential impacts during
school drop-off and pick-up times, and major intersections that may be
impacted during construction.
• Property Access. Access to parcels along the construction area shall be
maintained to the greatest extent feasible. Affected property owners shall
receive advance notice of work adjacent to their property access and when
driveways would be potentially closed.
• Schools. Any construction adjacent to schools shall ensure that access is
maintained for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, particularly at the
beginning and end of the school day.
• Buses, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. The work zone shall provide for passage by
buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly in the vicinity of schools.
• Intersections. Traffic control (i.e., use of flag persons) shall be used at
intersections that are determined to be unacceptably congested due to
construction traffic.
Implementation of the identified
mitigation would ensure that
impacts associated with
construction traffic would be less
than significant after mitigation.
Impact T-5. Construction of the
proposed Froom Ranch Way
bridge during phase 3 of the
Specific Plan buildout would
result in significant level of
service and queuing impacts at
study area intersections and
roadway segments. Mitigation
would reduce these impacts to
an acceptable level. This impact
would be Class II, less than
significant with mitigation.
T-5. Froom Ranch Way Bridge Phasing. The Froom Ranch Way bridge
connection shall be completed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 of the Specific Plan
buildout.
Implementation of the identified
mitigation would ensure that LOS
and queuing impacts associated
with the project’s proposed
infrastructure phasing would be
less than significant after mitigation.
Packet Pg. 355
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-47
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Impact T-6. The project site
plan would result in and
contribute to increased access
conflicts. Proposed access
controls are not consistent with
General Plan policy. Mitigation
would reduce these impacts to
an acceptable level. This impact
would be Class II, less than
significant with mitigation.
T-6. Project Site Intersection Roundabout Control. New roadway intersections
within the Specific Plan Area shall be controlled using roundabout design, unless
the City Public Works Department determines that roundabout control is infeasible.
Implementation of the identified
mitigation would ensure that the
project would be consistent with
General Plan Circulation Element
Policy 7.1.2, and would ensure that
transportation impacts due to
access conflicts would be reduced
to a less than significant level after
mitigation.
Impact T-7. The project site
plan would result in on-site
traffic volumes and speeds that
may exceed General Plan policy
thresholds, resulting potential
traffic hazards within the project
site. Mitigation would reduce
these impacts to an acceptable
level. This impact would be
Class II, less than significant
with mitigation.
T-7. Traffic Calming Features. New roadway intersections along San Luis Ranch
Road shall include neighborhood traffic circles at key intersections, and traffic-
calming features, such as diverters, along longer uninterrupted segments.
This mitigation would ensure that
potential traffic hazards within the
Specific Plan area would be
reduced to a less than significant
level after mitigation.
ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE INITIAL STUDY
Due to the proximity of the site
to the Los Osos Fault and
Alquist-Priolo Zone, impacts
associated with earthquakes
and ground shaking would be
potentially significant. In
addition, the project site has
been identified as being located
in an area of very high
liquefaction potential, moderate
to high expansion potential, and
high settlement potential. In
addition, during historical
drought years, groundwater
levels in the site vicinity were
lowered enough to cause
GEO-1. Earthquake and Ground Acceleration Design and Construction
Measures. Design and construction of the buildings, roadway infrastructure and all
subgrades shall be specifically proportioned to resist Design Earthquake Ground
Motions (Design amax) of SD1=0.481 and SDS=0.832 and engineered to withstand
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) peak ground acceleration (PGAM) equal
to 0.519 g, as described in the Soils Engineering Report for the project
(GeoSolutions, Inc., 2015). The design should take into consideration the soil type,
potential for liquefaction, and the most current and applicable seismic attenuation
methods that are available.
GEO-2. Operational Seismic Safety Requirement. For retail stores included in the
project, goods for sale may be stacked no higher than 8 feet from the floor in any
area where customers are present, unless provisions are made to prevent the
goods from falling during an earthquake of up to 7.5 magnitude. The stacking or
restraint methods shall be reviewed and approved by the City before approval of
occupancy permits, and shall be a standing condition of occupancy.
With implementation of the
mitigation described above, impacts
related to geology and soils would
be less than significant.
Packet Pg. 356
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-48
Table ES-2
Class II, Significant but Mitigable Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
subsidence.
GEO-3. Geotechnical Design. The project plans and specifications shall include
the geotechnical recommendations included in the Soils Engineering Report,
prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. on May 29, 2015. Recommendations therein that
shall be incorporated into the final project building plans include specification for the
following components of development preparation and design:
• Building Pad Preparation
• Paved Areas Preparation
• Pavement Design
• Interlocking Concrete Pavers
• Conventional Foundations
• Post-Tensioned Slabs
• Slab-On-Grade Construction
• Retaining Walls
• Exterior Concrete Flatwork
Packet Pg. 357
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-49
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
AESTHETICS
Impact AES-1. Although there
are potentially adverse impacts
to scenic viewsheds, the project
would implement the open
space and agricultural
preservation and design
elements included in the
proposed Specific Plan.
Therefore, potential impacts to
scenic vistas and scenic
resources within a state scenic
highway would be Class III, less
than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact AES-2. The project
would alter the existing visual
character of the site by
converting over half of the
agricultural site into a
predominantly residential and
commercial use site. Due to the
project’s visual compatibility with
surrounding development,
preservation of on-site open
space and agricultural land, and
compliance with design
guidelines, the project’s impact
on the visual character and
quality of the site would be
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact AES-3. The project
would introduce a new source of
nighttime lighting and daytime
glare, which could increase
ambient light and affect the
quality of the nighttime sky.
However, project compliance
with existing City requirements
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 358
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-50
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
and design guidelines would
limit the magnitude of these
effects. This would be Class III,
less than significant.
Cumulative Aesthetics
Impacts. As determined in the
LUCE Update EIR, all
development that adheres to
applicable General Plan policies
would result in less than
significant aesthetic impacts.
Therefore, the overall aesthetic
impact of cumulative
development in the project
vicinity would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact AG-2. The project would
alter the existing land use and
zoning on the project site.
However, these alterations
would be consistent with the
General Plan’s identification of
the San Luis Ranch Specific
Plan for a mix of urban,
agricultural, and open space
use. Therefore, this impact
would be Class III, less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact AG-4. Re-grading of the
project site would not result in
significant degradation of
viability of on-site agricultural
land. Therefore, this impact
would be Class III, less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 359
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-51
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Cumulative Agricultural
Resources Impacts. Consistent
with the LUCE Update EIR, the
project would implement Land
Use Element Policies 1.8.1 and
1.9.2, and Conservation and
Open Space Element Policy
8.6.3. As a result, cumulative
impacts would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-4 . The project would
not expose sensitive receptors
to substantial pollutant
concentrations. This impact
would be Class III, less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impact GHG-1. The San Luis
Ranch Specific Plan is
consistent with the City’s
Climate Action Plan. This impact
would be Class III, less than
significant.
The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan.
No mitigation is required.
This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
HAZARDS/ HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-1. Small quantities
of hazardous materials may be
used in conjunction with the
proposed residential and
commercial retail uses on site.
However, these materials would
be limited in type and quantity
such that they would not create
a hazard to the public or
environment. Therefore, this
impact would be Class III, less
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 360
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-52
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
than significant.
Impact HAZ-2. The project site
is adjacent to U.S. Highway 101,
on which accidents that involve
hazardous materials could
occur. Such accidents could
potentially create a significant
hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the
environment. However,
compliance with applicable
regulations related to the
handling and storage of
hazardous materials would
minimize the risk of the public’s
potential exposure to these
substances, resulting in a Class
III, less than significant, impact.
Transport of hazardous materials on U.S. 101 and other roadways, including U.S.
101, would be required to comply with all federal, State, and local laws pertaining to
the handling of hazardous materials. No mitigation is required.
This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact HAZ-3. Two schools are
located within one-quarter mile
of the project site. Compliance
with existing federal, State, and
local regulations would ensure
that hazardous materials
impacts to schools would remain
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact HAZ-7. Asbestos
Containing Material (ACM) and
Lead Based Paint (LBP) may be
present in existing on-site
structures. Demolition of these
structures would be required to
comply with applicable State
and local policies and
regulations for the control and
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 361
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-53
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
remediation of hazardous
materials to prevent human
exposure. Therefore, this impact
would be Class III, less than
significant.
Impact HAZ-8. The project site
is located within a San Luis
Obispo County Regional Airport
area of influence. The project
would be consistent with the
CALUPH Airport Safety Zones,
which represent the extent of
Airport-related safety hazard
zones for people residing or
working in these areas.
Therefore, this impact would be
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Hazards and
Hazardous Materials Impacts.
As described in the LUCE
Update EIR, adherence to
applicable General Plan policies
and applicable State and federal
regulatory requirements would
reduce any cumulative hazards
and hazardous materials
impacts resulting from buildout
of the City under the General
Plan, including buildout of the
San Luis Ranch Specific Plan,
to a less than significant level.
The uses proposed for the San
Luis Ranch Project would be
consistent with the CALUPH
Airport Safety Zones, which
represent the extent of Airport-
related safety hazard zones for
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 362
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-54
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
people residing or working in
these areas. As such, the
project would not result in a
substantial contribution to
cumulative aircraft related
hazards in the City.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HWQ-2. The project
would alter the existing drainage
pattern of the project site, which
could result in flooding, erosion,
or siltation onsite and offsite.
However, the proposed retention
and detention systems, along
with compliance with applicable
regulations, would ensure that
this impact would remain Class
III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Hydrology and
Water Quality Impacts.
Water Quality. The project, in
conjunction with pending
cumulative development would
not significantly increase the
concentration of urban
pollutants such as oil, grease,
and vehicular heavy metals in
surface runoff. Polluted runoff
which may be generated during
construction activities of
cumulative development and
projects considered in this
analysis would be regulated by
the SWRCB under General
Construction, NPDES permits,
and would be minimized through
the implementation of standard
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 363
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-55
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
construction BMPs. Cumulative
impacts would therefore be less
than significant for water quality.
Flooding. The proposed on-site
drainage system would
adequately capture associated
runoff, and the project would not
substantially contribute to
flooding on- or off-site. The
project grading plan has been
designed such that the resulting
post-development floodplain
would exclude areas proposed
for housing. Overall, cumulative
impacts to hydrology and water
quality would be less than
significant.
LAND USE
Impact LU-3. The Specific Plan
would be consistent with the
land use strategy in SLOCOG’s
2014 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy. This impact would be
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact LU-4. The Specific Plan
would allow residential and non-
residential land uses consistent
with density and use restrictions
in the City’s Airport Safety
Zones, which represent the
extent of Airport-related safety
hazard zones for people residing
or working in these areas. The
LUCE Update EIR provided
substantial evidence that the
development of the San Luis
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 364
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-56
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Ranch Specific Plan Area under
the updated General Plan land
use designations would be
consistent with ALUP safety and
noise standards. The project
would not conflict with land use
policies intended to prevent
airport-related safety hazards.
Therefore, this impact would be
Class III, less than significant.
NOISE
Impact N-2. Short-term
construction activities would
generate intermittent levels of
groundborne vibration. However,
the expected vibration level
during construction of the
project would not be perceptible
at the nearest residential
receptors. This impact would be
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Impact N-3. Project-generated
traffic would incrementally
increase traffic-related noise on
study area roadway segments,
except on Madonna Road near
the project site, which would
potentially affect existing noise-
sensitive receptors along local
roadways. However, the
increase in traffic noise levels
along area roadways would not
exceed 3 dBA, which is the
increase threshold typically
audible to the human ear.
Therefore, the effect of
increased traffic noise would be
Class III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 365
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-57
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
Cumulative Noise Impacts.
Traffic noise levels along
roadways in the project vicinity
would not increase by more than
0.5 dBA due to cumulative
traffic. This increase would not
be significant based on the
applicable traffic noise increase
threshold of 3 dBA. Therefore,
the project’s contribution to
traffic noise would not be
cumulatively considerable or
significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
WATER RESOURCES
Impact WR-1. The project would
increase water demand as a
result of new residential and
commercial development on the
project site. However, the
project’s water demand would
be within the City of San Luis
Obispo’s projected primary
water supply. Therefore, impacts
to water supply would be Class
III, less than significant.
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Water Resources
Impacts. The project’s water
demand would not exceed
supply when combined with all
possible future development
within the City. In addition, the
project would reduce the overall
demand on the San Luis Obispo
groundwater basin as a result of
reduced on-site agricultural uses
and, therefore, would not
exacerbate potential cumulative
impacts on the local
No mitigation is required. This impact would be less than
significant without mitigation.
Packet Pg. 366
14
San Luis Ranch Project EIR
Executive Summary
City of San Luis Obispo
ES-58
Table ES-3
Class III, Less than Significant Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure Residual Impact
groundwater basin associate
with future development within
the City. Accordingly, the
project’s cumulative water
supply impact would be less
than significant.
Packet Pg. 367
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 1
180317.1
TERM SHEET
FOR
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND
MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
a. The purpose of this Term Sheet is to outline basic terms by which the City of San
Luis Obispo (“City”) and MI San Luis Ranch, LLC (“Developer”) will be
negotiating a proposed Development Agreement for the orderly development of
the Project described in the Specific Plan (“Project”) on the real property
identified as APN: 067-121-022 (“Property”). This Term Sheet generally
addresses the list of issues described herein and memorializes the anticipated
terms of the proposed Development Agreement or outlines a process and/or
general approach to reach agreement.
b. The objective of the Development Agreement is to coordinate all entitlements and
provide for and secure for the orderly development of the Project and delineate a
process to specify both general and extraordinary benefits related to the
Development Agreement.
c. The final terms for the Development Agreement shall be negotiated in good faith
and nothing in this Term Sheet is binding on either party. This Term Sheet, by
memorializing the discussions to date between City and Developer, is intended to
provide clarity in planning for and facilitating the Project’s compliance with
CEQA, the processing of entitlements for the Project, and, if approved, the
orderly development of the Project.
d. Because full environmental review under CEQA and/or other state, federal, and
local environmental laws is required as part of City’s evaluation of whether to
approve the Project, nothing set forth in this Term Sheet commits or otherwise
requires City or any other federal, state, or other local agency to approve, in
whole or in part, the Project.
2. DURATION OF AGREEMENT
a. The duration of the Development Agreement is expected to be 20-30 years from
the date the Development Agreement becomes effective (“Effective Date”), but
shall comply with the time extensions and cancellations in City Municipal Code
section 17.94.190 and California Government Code sections 65868 and 65869.5
and other applicable law. The Development Agreement shall include an
expiration date within five years of effective date if the first phase of construction
is not completed.
b. The Development Agreement shall specify commencement of construction dates
along with related milestones. Failure to meet designated milestones may result in
cancellation of, and/or a reduction in the term of, the Development Agreement.
Packet Pg. 368
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 2
180317.1
3. PERMITTED USES OF THE PROPERTY
a. The permitted uses of the Property are those identified, described, and otherwise
shown in the approved Specific Plan and other regulatory documents to be
included in the Development Agreement by reference. The Project shall be
limited to the expressed density and intensity of uses as shown in the approved
Specific Plan and other Project entitlements.
4. MAXIMUM DENSITY, HEIGHT, AND SIZE OF BUILDINGS
a. Any vested right relating to maximum density, height, and size of buildings shall
be for the term of the Development Agreement, subject only to the procedures and
design review standards for review of individual building projects (i.e.,
Architectural Review Commission, Cultural Heritage Commission, etc.). The
density, heights, and sizes of buildings are subjected to all Specific Plan polices or
other regulatory documents to be included in the Development Agreement by
reference.
5. PROVISIONS FOR RESERVATION OR DEDICATION OF LAND FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
a. Before the sooner of (i) the recordation of a subdivision map for any portion of
the Project or (ii) the issuance of a building permit for the first structure to be built
as part of the first phase of the Project, Developer shall offer to dedicate to City a
conservation easement, or multiple conservation easements, preserving the land
designated by the Specific Plan as either Agriculture or Open Space in the form of
an Agriculture Easement (“Agriculture Easement”) and an Open Space Easement
(“Open Space Easement,” and collectively, the “Conservation Easements”).
Developer shall be entitled to make use of the land subject to the Conservation
Easements consistent with (i) the requirements of the Conservation Easements;
(ii) City rules, regulations, and policies, including but not limited to those
governing agriculture, agricultural buffers, wells, groundwater treatment facilities,
water lines, recreational and educational uses (including bicycle and pedestrian
paths), unpaved roadways and parking areas for agricultural purposes and
maintenance access, and surface drainage and flood management; (iii) Specific
Plan Policies, General Plan Policies, CEQA mitigation measures, conditions of
subdivision maps, and other project entitlements; and (iv) any other applicable
law or development standards in place on the Effective Date.
b. Developer shall partially fulfill the obligations of the Conservation Easements by
dedicating a portion of the Property for use as agricultural and open space land
consistent with City’s adopted General Plan and certified Final Environmental
Impact Report (“FEIR”) Mitigation Measures for the Project and any other
applicable conditions of approval or applicable regulations for the Project.
c. A portion of the agricultural/open space land may be mitigated off-site through an
agricultural/open space conservation easement on comparable land by providing
land for an agricultural/open space easement at a ratio to be determined by the
City’s Natural Resource Manager that contain specific characteristics of the land
proposed consistent in accordance with the FEIR, or through the payment of fees
to City for City’s use as a portion of monies available for the subsequent purchase
of a larger parcel of acceptable off-site mitigation property in fee or the purchase
of agricultural/open space conservation easements. In no case, shall comparable
Packet Pg. 369
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 3
180317.1
offsite mitigation ratios be less than 1acre to 1acre. Any obligations of the Project
and Developer to meet those agriculture and open space requirements shall also
comply with all FEIR Mitigation Measures for the Project and any other policies
and development standards for the Project.
d. Developer agrees to fulfill its Quimby Act, General Plan Park Element, and other
applicable City park and recreation obligations by constructing the appropriate
onsite park and recreation improvements to the satisfaction of the Parks and
Recreation Commission. Should the amount of acreage dedicated to parks and
recreation amenities be insufficient to meet Developer’s obligation, Developer
shall dedicate property off-site, and/or pay applicable fees to accomplish the
same.
e. City agrees to consider an access easement to Developer for agricultural
operations on San Luis Ranch and temporary construction access across the
property commonly known as “City Farm property” (APN’s 053-152-006, 053-
152-008, and 053-152-007) within the area covered by the extension of Calle
Joaquin to the common property line. The Development Agreement shall specify
the terms for shared maintenance obligations of City and Developer as to that
access easement, as well as any necessary improvements.
6. INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED
a. Developer shall construct all infrastructure, including but not limited to that
required by the subdivision map(s), as outlined in the FEIR for the Project,
conditions of approval for the Project, the Specific Plan, or any other related
policies or standards, subject to any reimbursement requirements identified in the
Development Agreement or other Project entitlements. Infrastructure shall
include, but shall not be limited to, improvements for streets and sidewalks, parks
and recreation facilities, stormwater management and wetlands, grading and
floodplain management, storm drain, sanitary sewer, domestic and recycled water
infrastructure, and transit to support the development of the Project as shown in
the approved entitlements, including but not limited to the Project’s Specific Plan,
FEIR, conditions of approval, or other related development standards. City shall
consider granting easements across City property that may be required for the
orderly development of the Project.
b. City and Developer shall mutually agree on the timing of infrastructure
improvements to be constructed by Developer. Construction of these
improvements shall not commence any later than the triggering date or event for
these improvements as determined by the certified FEIR or other conditions of
approval. A financing plan for the improvements shall be included in the
Development Agreement. The financing plan shall identify Developer funding,
City impact fees, other private investment, land-secured (special district) funding,
and non-Developer funding from City or other public agencies.
c. Project entitlements shall include typical conditions of approval, including
acquisition of fee and/or easement rights of access, construction, and
maintenance-repair-replacement for any off-site infrastructure improvements
outside of the control of either City or Developer as required by California
Government Code section 66462.5. In addition to the options provided to the City
by Government Code section 66462.5, the City may opt at the sole discretion of
Packet Pg. 370
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 4
180317.1
the Public Works Director to require the Developer to design and construct the
roundabout as specified in the subdivision map on the Project site.
d. Prior to recordation of the final map the Developer shall complete the design of
Dalidio Road improvements and exhaust all feasible efforts to acquire the
necessary off-site dedications, easements, and agreements to construct any
infrastructure for the Project on the site at 1655 Dalidio Drive on which the
United States Post Office is currently located (APN: 053-012-013). In addition to
the options provided to the City by Government Code section 66462.5, the City
may opt to require the Developer to explore other feasible alternatives within the
scope of the EIR mitigate any impacts.
e. Developer and City shall cooperate to provide and make available real property
currently owned by either Developer or City and necessary for construction of
those public improvements, such as, but not limited to (i) construction of the
Prado Road Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange required by the certified
FEIR, (ii) extension of Froom Ranch Way, (iii) improvements to Madonna Road,
(iv) or other improvements needed to satisfy Project approvals.
f. Prior to approval of the final subdivision map for the Project, Developer shall
convey by fee or by grant of an irrevocable offer of dedication rights across the
Property required for construction of the improvements associated with: 1) the
Prado Road Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange, 2) Madonna Road,
3) Dalidio/Prado Road, 4) Froom Ranch Way and 5) any other street for public
purposes.
g. City and Developer shall diligently pursue all aspects of the applications to
Caltrans, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other agencies required for
construction of the Prado Road Overcrossing or Freeway Interchange, and all
environmental processing and supporting technical studies. City and Developer
shall diligently and cooperatively pursue the planning, engineering, cost
estimating, and other efforts necessary to determine the final cost and design of
the Prado Road Overcrossing or Freeway Interchange. City shall provide timely
review and responses to all such applications made in respect to the Prado Road
Overcrossing and/or Freeway Interchange.
7. WATER RIGHTS
a. The Project shall comply with the California Water Code and the regulations
imposed pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) for
all matters related to water rights. City and Developer acknowledge that
Developer neither relinquishes nor conveys to City any rights with respect to
groundwater or other water rights with respect to the Property. Further, Developer
expressly reserves any and all water rights it has in connection with the Property
and the Project. Developer shall be entitled to irrigate the agricultural/open space
land utilizing groundwater as long as water quality meets or exceeds all applicable
water quality standards, and shall not be required by City to irrigate that land with
reclaimed water in lieu of groundwater unless Developer at its sole option chooses
to connect to City’s water system for purposes of irrigation of
agricultural/openspace; provided, however, that nothing in the Development
Agreement shall exempt the Project or Developer from groundwater regulations
imposed by a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). City and Developer
Packet Pg. 371
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 5
180317.1
acknowledge that pursuant to applicable rules and regulations, Developer may use
well water for irrigation purposes within the parcel boundary of agricultural/open
space land.
8. AFFORDABLE HOUSING
a. At a minimum, developer shall provide affordable housing, including rental and
for-sale units, consistent with the approved Affordable Housing Plan for the
Project. All affordable units required for the residential development will be
integrated into the neighborhoods on-site and will be subject to long-term
affordability agreements. The housing units required for the commercial
development could be provided on-site, off-site, or the requirement may be met
by payment of in-lieu fees.
9. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
a. The Community Development Director may authorize the Developer to construct
up to 50% of annual units in a calendar year in excess of those permitted by the
approved phasing schedule required by the Specific Plan if he or she determines
that doing so is necessary to allow financing of essential project infrastructure.
The purpose of this section is to expressly allow for the financing of infrastructure
and is not a general waiver of the requirements under the City’s Growth
Management Ordinance.
10. FEES AND EXACTIONS
a. The Developer shall be required to pay all City-wide and Project-specific
development impact fees, excluding sewer and water impact fees addressed in
section 10(b) below, for the Project’s fair share of the cost to mitigate Project
impacts as identified in the Final Impact Report, Specific Plan, conditions of
approval or otherwise specified in the Development Agreement in effect when
each final map is recorded. All development impact fees shall be adjusted
annually based on an inflation index identified upon imposition of the fee.
b. The Developer shall be required to pay sewer and water impact fees in accordance
with the AB1600 analysis in effect when each Final Map is recorded. Sewer and
water impact fees in effect as of the date that the Final Map is recorded and may
be adjusted annually and shall be paid upon recordation of each final map at the
rate then effective.
c. Fees imposed by City, including but not limited to planning, engineering, building
permit, fire plan check and development impact fees, but excluding sewer and
water impact fees governed by section 10(b) above, shall be in accordance with
the fees in effect as of the date of when the Final Map is recorded and may be
adjusted annually in conformance with applicable City Policies.
d. If the City amends any existing Development Impact Fee (DIF) program to
include additional projects or costs for the benefit of the Project (either new
projects or increased costs for projects included in the analysis supporting existing
fees) for improvements necessary to satisfy Project requirements, Developer will
be required to pay the amended fees. Credits applied towards infrastructure costs
advanced by Developer shall apply when building permits are issued or fees are
otherwise due and shall arise only from Developer funded construction of
Packet Pg. 372
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 6
180317.1
infrastructure or community facilities included in the project list on which a
particular fee was based. Credits applied when building permits are issued or fees
are otherwise due pursuant to this section shall be adjusted for inflation
consistently with such adjustments of the fees against which credits are allowed.
e. The Developer shall pay all then-current processing fees for any subsequent
planning applications and permits as adopted by the City Council.
f. City acknowledges that Developer may dedicate property and install
infrastructure improvements beyond its “fair share” cost. The City agrees to
consider fee credits and reimbursements, funded by Development Impact Fees
paid by other developers, and traffic impact fees, where eligible, but excluding
sewer and water impact fees. Nothing in the Development Agreement shall
preclude City and Developer from entering infrastructure-item-specific
reimbursement agreements for the portion of the cost of any dedications, public
facilities and/or infrastructure the City may require the Developer to construct as
conditions of the Project Approvals to the extent that they exceed the Project’s
“fair share”.
g. The Developer may be reimbursed by other private development(s) for those
developments’ “Fair Share” of the cost to construct sewer and water infrastructure
per San Luis Obispo Municipal Code sections 16.20.100 and 16.20.110. The
Developer will provide a study identifying the benefit area for each such
reimbursement agreement, conforming to San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
section 16.20.110, for review and approval of the Utilities Director, and may
provide for reimbursement for segments of infrastructure which meet a utility’s
minimum size standard if the study shows those minimally sized facilities to
benefit identified additional developments.
h. The Developer has advanced funding to process a Caltrans Project Study Report
(PSR) for the US 101/Prado Road Interchange. The Developer will either be
reimbursed by other development projects for costs beyond the Project’s “Fair
Share” of this improvement or receive an upfront fee credit for expenditures for
the PSR as established in the final Development Agreement.
11. NEW TAXES
a. Any City-wide taxes enacted or increased after the Effective Date shall apply to
the Project only if (i) such taxes apply City-wide and do not discriminate against
Developer, (ii) such taxes apply to the Property prospectively, and (iii) the
application of such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with the
Development Agreement.
12. INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
a. The Development Agreement shall include a financing plan that specifies the
form and mechanism of public financing to be used and the obligations of City
and Developer as to such public financing (“Financing Plan”). To fund timely
construction of necessary improvements as discussed in section 6, the Financing
Plan may require Developer to pay for some portion of the public improvements
beyond the Project’s “fair share” of costs and before funding for related
Packet Pg. 373
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 7
180317.1
reimbursement by City has been secured. This may be accomplished through
reimbursement agreements; land-secured public financing for the Project, such as
formation of a community facilities district; use of tax increment financing
through an infrastructure financing district; negotiation of the Tax Exchange
Agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo; or outside sources of public
investment, such as grants. City’s General Fund shall not be obligated for such
debt. City agrees to create and administer the financing mechanism(s) and to
make best efforts in consultation with Developer to identify other funding sources
to support the orderly development of the Project. Nothing in this Term Sheet or
the Development Agreement shall constitute an unlawful pre-commitment of the
City’s legislative discretion or its discretion as to quasi-judicial matters which are
required to be determined after notice and hearing and on the basis of an adequate
administrative record. Nothing in this Term Sheet or the Development Agreement
shall be in denigration of the rights of third parties under applicable law.
13. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CEQA MITIGATION AND OTHER MITIGATION MEASURES
a. The Development Agreement will incorporate by reference all applicable FEIR
mitigation measures adopted for the Project in addition to the conditions of other
Project approvals.
14. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
a. As stated in section 12(a) above, the Developer will agree to the formation of one
or more community facilities districts as one of many sources of revenue to fund
infrastructure. The City agrees to bring forward the formation of one or more
community facilities district for Council consideration to finance public
infrastructure and/or public services. Such community facilities districts may
levy special taxes to fund public facilities, local infrastructure maintenance, and
City services to the Project so it does not negatively impact City service levels to
other residents and property owners.
b. Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) applicable to real property
shall obligate a homeowner’s association, or other common-interest association,
to bear any and all obligations for funding local infrastructure maintenance and
support for City services if an applicable community facilities district is repealed
by initiative pursuant to article XIII C, section 3 of the California Constitution, or
repealed in any other manner other than voluntary rescission by the City Council.
Each portion of the project which includes infrastructure to be maintained by the
benefited properties shall be subject to CC&Rs sufficient to attain the objective of
this paragraph (b), although the parties recognize multiple homeowner or
property-owner associations may be created for portions or phases of the
development.
15. PHASING
a. The Development Agreement shall require Developer to construct certain
improvements in addition to those “in-tract” improvements required pursuant to
the subdivision map(s) for all six phases of the Project, per the phasing schedule
approved as part of the Specific Plan. Developer shall construct and convey to
City identified infrastructure and community facilities concurrently with
Packet Pg. 374
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 8
180317.1
development of the discrete phases of the Project to be served by each
infrastructure element or community facility.
b. The Public Works and Community Development Directors may defer the deadline
for the Developer to construct and convey an infrastructure element or community
facility consistently with applicable Project mitigation measures, City policies and
the Development Agreement.
c. Notwithstanding the provisions of any phasing requirements in the Project
approvals, City and Developer recognize that economic and market conditions
may necessitate changing the order in which the infrastructure is constructed.
Therefore, City and Developer will agree that if it becomes necessary or desirable
to develop any portion of the Project's infrastructure in an order that differs from
the order set forth in the Project approvals, Developer may propose any such
modification request which the City will consider in good faith so long as the
modification continues to ensure adequate infrastructure is available to serve that
portion of the Project being developed subject to environmental analysis and any
other regulatory actions necessary to inform the public and decision makers of the
potential impacts of any deviations from the planned order set forth in Project
approvals. Developer acknowledges that such a modification of the project will be
subject to CEQA and may require an amendment of the Development Agreement
or other entitlements.
16. MORATORIUM
a. No City-imposed moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate,
timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the
Project, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order, or
otherwise, and whether enacted by the City Council, an agency of City, the
electorate, or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative,
vesting tentative, or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other
entitlements to use or service (including, without limitation, water and sewer)
approved, issued, or granted within City, or portions of City, following the
approval of the Specific Plan, shall apply to the Project to the extent such
moratorium or other limitation is in conflict with the Development Agreement;
provided, however, the provisions of this Section shall not affect City’s
compliance with moratoria or other limitations mandated by other governmental
agencies or court-imposed moratoria or other limitations.
17. FORECE MEJEURE
a. Language shall be included in the Development Agreement which exempts the
City from any liability whatsoever in the event of force majeure.
18. SUBDIVISION MAPS
a. The term of any approved tentative subdivision map shall be extended through the
term of the Development Agreement and beyond the minimum term for such
maps under the Subdivision Map Act, City regulations, and other applicable law
and in the manner and subject to such notice as is required by such law.
Subsequent phased tentative and final maps shall be processed in accordance with
Packet Pg. 375
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 9
180317.1
applicable law, including applicable City standards and regulations Amendments
to any approved subdivision maps shall not extend the term of the Development
Agreement.
19. SUBSEQUENT APPROVALS
a. Applications for approval of building and architectural plans shall include a final
package of materials, including a site plan identifying the building location, floor
plans, exterior materials and colors, vertical dimensions, hardscape and landscape
concepts, and fenestration in accordance with the requirements of the Specific
Plan. Any deviation from the requirements of the Specific Plan of these items
shall be subject to review and approval by the Architectural Review Commission
pursuant to adopted design standards and guidelines. Developer will incorporate
construction elements that reduce potable water and energy consumption, utilize
“state of the art” irrigation systems, and offer access to solar energy options
required by the applicable Building Code in effect at the time each building
permit is issued for development of the Project. Buildings shall incorporate non-
reflective roofing material and roof-mounted equipment to minimize glare
impacts on overflying aircraft.
b. City shall approve, consistently with applicable law, a Rough Grading Plan and
allow rough grading of the land subject to each final subdivision map before its
approval and recordation subject to conditions as determined by the Community
Development Director. A rough grading permit will comply with all applicable
approvals and be subject to regulations to ensure public health and safety.
Furthermore, issuance of a rough grading permit will be subject to the
Community Development Director’s determination that Developer is working
diligently and cooperatively to move the Project toward full permits and
construction.
c. Public and private parks will be subject to Parks and Recreation Commission
review and approval. Plans will include (at a minimum) landscape, irrigation,
hardscape, park furniture, and play equipment, along with proposed public art, all
consistent with applicable City regulations.
20. ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFERS
a. Developer may transfer the Property (or portions of the Property) and the rights
and responsibilities of the Development Agreement in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and City standards and regulations. However, in
implementing such transfers, the Development Agreement may require the
original landowner to remain fully responsible for all Developer obligations under
the Development Agreement (e.g., construction of infrastructure and obligation
for public benefits), unless City is satisfied that the subsequent landowner has the
resources and experience to meet these obligations. Restrictions on transfer shall
not apply to a transfer by Developer to an affiliate of Developer.
21. ANNUAL REVIEW
a. The Community Development Director shall review compliance with the
Development Agreement at time intervals specified in the Development
Agreement, but not less than once every twelve months, as required by California
Packet Pg. 376
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 10
180317.1
Government Code section 65865.1. The purpose of the review shall be to
determine whether the terms or conditions of the Development Agreement are
being met.
22. INDEMNIFICATION
a. The Development Agreement shall include an indemnification provision, in which
Developer agrees to defend, indemnify, save, and hold harmless City and its
elected and appointed boards, commissions, officers, agents, and employees from
any and all claims, costs, and liability for any damages, personal injury, or death,
which may arise, directly or indirectly, from Developer’s, or Developer’s
contractors’, subcontractors’, agents’, or employees’ operations under the
Development Agreement, whether such operations be performed by Developer or
by any of Developer’s contractors or subcontractors or by any one or more
persons directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for Developer or any
of Developer’s contractors or subcontractors.
23. VESTED RIGHTS
a. During the term of the Development Agreement, Developer shall have a vested
right to develop the Project as defined in the Project approvals in accordance with
the applicable rules, regulations, and policies identified in the Development
Agreement. City agrees not to take any actions, formal or informal, prior to
annexation that would negatively impact the existing entitlements on the Property.
If state or federal laws or regulations enacted after execution of the Development
Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the
Development Agreement, City will modify or suspend the Development
Agreement as required by California Government Code section 65869.5 only to
the extent necessary to comply with such laws or regulations. Subsequent City
ordinances, regulations, and requirements applicable to the Development
Agreement shall be governed by City Municipal Code section 17.94.160, and the
Development Agreement may be amended pursuant to City Municipal Code
section 17.94.190 and California Government Code section 65868.
24. EXTRAORDINARY PUBLIC BENEFITS
a. The Development Agreement shall identify and include extraordinary public
benefits, such as infrastructure improvements, public open space, or monetary
payments such as “in lieu” fees, in exchange for certainty related to Developer’s
entitlements and other considerations conferred by the Development Agreement.
Extraordinary public benefits are those that exceed the exactions that may be
required for development under City’s Subdivision Map Ordinance or other City
land use regulations.
b. Developer shall be required to share financial information with City and/or an
independent third party selected by the City as its representative if necessary for
City’s evaluation of the financial capacity of the Project and/or Developer to
provide the extraordinary public benefits referenced in the Development
Agreement. City shall maintain such data in confidence as permitted by California
Government Code section 6254, subdivisions (h), (i) & (n), and California
Government Code section 6255.
Packet Pg. 377
14
FINAL TERM SHEET SAN LUIS RANCH
071928\8719071v2 11
180317.1
25. LOCALLY ADOPTED REQUIREMENTS
a. The Development Agreement shall comply with City Municipal Code Chapter
17.94.
26. DEFAULT, CURE, AND REMEDIES
a. The Development Agreement will include standard terms specifying how either
City or Developer may enforce it; provided, however, that in no event shall City
be liable for damages for any breach of the Development Agreement. Developer’s
remedy against City for breach shall be limited to specific performance.
Packet Pg. 378
14
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Doug Davidson, Deputy Community Development Director
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17: ZONING
REGULATIONS, ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
WITH AN EXEMPTION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce an ordinance to amend Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code
(Attachment B) with an exemption from environmental review.
BACKGROUND
A study session was held for the Council on March 21, 2017 to provide an overview of
Development Agreements in the context of state law and Municipal Code findings required by
the City of San Luis Obispo (see Attachment C for study session staff report). This study session
was scheduled in advance of the San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch projects coming forward that
have both requested a Development Agreement to memorialize the commitments of both the
developer and the City. At the study session, the Council directed staff to bring back a minor
amendment to the Development Agreements Chapter of the Zoning Regulations to enable the
potential for Development Agreements for these larger, complex projects.
A Development Agreement is a mechanism to provide certainty in the development process and
a means by which developers can protect their investment, a municipality can provide certainty
about public improvements and financing and address other issues that are outside the regulatory
authority of a City. A Development Agreement is also a contract between a municipality and a
property owner/developer, which provides the developer with vested rights by freezing the
existing zoning regulations and other issues applicable to a property in exchange for public
benefits.
A Development Agreement is a contract between a developer and a City (or County) in which
the city provides the developer with vested development rights for a defined period. In exchange
for these extra benefits, the developer is required to provide “extraordinary” public or
“community” benefits that exceed what the City could otherwise constitutionally require through
the normal process of exercising its land use regulation authority (these are “police powers”
delegated to local government by the state) in establishing conditions of approval for a project.
In general, the evolution of the Development Agreement as a land use tool is a consequence of a
larger tension between increasingly complicated land use regulations, high degree of public
engagement, and developers’ and a community’s desire for certainty.
Packet Pg. 379
15
DISCUSSION
The City adopted Municipal Code Chapter 17.94 in 1989 to establish procedures and
requirements for the City’s processing and administration of development. This chapter in the
City’s Municipal Code supplements the framework set forth in the State Government Code
which authorizes the use of Development Agreements as a planning entitlement tool.
The approval process for Development Agreements requires the Planning Commission to make a
recommendation to the City Council, in consideration of the following findings (17.94.100):
A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any
applicable specific plan;
B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other
applicable ordinances and regulations;
C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more
comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or
necessary public improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the
development agreement with the applicant; and
D. The proposed project and development agreement:
1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working
in the surrounding area;
2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent
land uses; or
3. Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
(Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
Under Section 17.94.120.B (City Council Approval), the City Council may approve a
Development Agreement by making the Findings in 17.94.100 above.
Final Environmental Impact Reports are being circulated for both the San Luis Ranch and Avila
Ranch developments. Both reports conclude that there will be significant adverse impacts on the
environment even after all reasonable and feasible mitigation measures are implemented. Thus,
under section D.3 above, both projects are not eligible for a Development Agreement.
These two pending projects both propose to use Development Agreement in order to coordinate
the extensive financing, phasing, and environmental mitigations associated with these projects.
The inability to use a Development Agreement would be a significant disadvantage for the City
in terms of addressing the complicated planning and financing issues that are associated with
projects, such as these.
At the study session in March, 2017, the Council directed staff to come back with revisions to
Chapter 17.94 to facilitate the use of Development Agreements for complex housing projects that
may have remaining adverse impacts; even after all reasonable and feasible mitigation measures
have been imposed. Staff is recommending deletion of 17.94.100.D.3:
3. Will not have a significant impact on the environment.
Packet Pg. 380
15
This change will allow the CEQA process to govern the determination and mitigation of impacts
while enabling projects to use a Development Agreement with the City to provide certainty,
identify community benefits, and address financing issues. The finding in Section 17.94.100.D.3
is not necessary given the mandatory CEQA process to address and mitigate environmental
impacts.
It should also be noted that for large projects, such as San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch, it is
almost automatic that a significant impact as defined by CEQA will result from project
construction or operation. Two examples of commonly triggered impacts by large projects are
air quality and noise, especially during project construction. San Luis Obispo is defined under
State standards as a “non-attainment” area because ozone and particulate matter exceed the State
thresholds for air quality. Since air quality is considered a significant impact un der existing
conditions, the impacts of a large projects are found to be inconsistent with local air quality
plans, and thus, a significant impact. Likewise, the grading and construction of large projects
typically exceed the local noise standards during the time the project is being constructed.
In the CEQA context, there are frequently projects which utilize a Development Agreement that
result in significant unavoidable impacts. In this case, the City Council is required to make a
Statement of Overriding Considerations to acknowledge those impacts and identify the
community benefits that outweigh the project’s environmental risks.
CONCURRENCES
Administration, Community Development, and Public Works Departments concur with the
recommended action on amending the Zoning Regulation chapter on Development Agreements.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the
potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. It can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the
environment. The activity is not subject to CEQA because the minor amendment to the Zoning
Regulations regarding Development Agreements will have no effect on the environment; any
actual Development Agreement will be subject to Chapter 17.94 of the Zoning Regulations and
CEQA. Any project associated with a Development Agreement will undergo environmental
review under CEQA. This exemption applies as projects will continue to be required to mitigate
impacts to the maximum extent feasible.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed minor modification to the Zoning Regulations regarding Development Agreements
will have no fiscal impact. The proposed Ordinance change will facilitate future Development
Agreements for projects. There are a variety of financial objectives related to including a
Development Agreement as part of the entitlement package for any project. A primary purpose
is to clearly articulate both the City and developer’s financial responsibilities and because a
Packet Pg. 381
15
Development Agreement is voluntary in nature, it provides a mechanism for the City to require
improvements or other remuneration that is not otherwise required by policy, development
standard or any required mitigations.
Development Agreements should be evaluated within the City’s financial policies and
appreciation for comprehensive fiscal impacts. If infrastructure financing is sought as part of a
Development Agreement, comprehensive debt capacity should be viewed as shared resource by
all of the local governments serving the development area.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The City Council could decide not to amend the Zoning Regulations regarding
Development Agreements. This is not recommended because the Council previously
directed staff to revise the Ordinance to facilitate Development Agreements for large,
complex projects, such as San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch.
2. The Council could continue the introduction of the proposed Zoning Regulations
amendments and provide direction to staff for research and revisions.
Attachments:
a - Legislative Draft of Zoning Regulations Amendments (Chapter 17.94)
b - Draft Ordinance
c – Staff Report – Study session on Development Agreements (3/21/17)
Packet Pg. 382
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
Chapter 17.94: Development Agreements
Sections:
17.94.010 Purpose and scope.
17.94.020 Authority.
17.94.030 Initiation of hearings.
17.94.040 Applications—Legal interest.
17.94.050 Fees.
17.94.060 Preapplication review.
17.94.070 Application—Contents.
17.94.080 Public notice.
17.94.090 Failure to receive notice.
17.94.100 Planning commission hearing and recommendation.
17.94.110 City council hearing.
17.94.120 City council action.
17.94.130 Development agreement—Contents.
17.94.140 Development agreement—Adoption by ordinance—Execution of contract.
17.94.150 Recordation of executed agreement.
17.94.160 Ordinances, regulations and requirements applicable to development.
17.94.170 Subsequently enacted state and federal laws.
17.94.180 Enforcement—Continuing validity.
17.94.190 Amendment—Time extension—Cancellation.
17.94.200 Review for compliance—Director’s authority.
17.94.210 Violation of agreement—Council review and action.
17.94.220 Modification or termination for violations.
17.94.230 Consequences of termination.
17.94.240 Irregularity in proceedings.
17.94.250 Coordination of approvals.
17.94.010 Purpose and scope.
Development agreements specify the rights and responsibilities of the city and developers.
Used in conjunction with subdivision approval, annexation, rezoning, or architectural
approval, development agreements establish the terms and conditions under which
development projects may proceed. Development agreements are best used for large,
complex or phased projects which require extended construction time and which involve
numerous public improvements such as streets, utilities, flood improvements, schools, parks
and open space and other improvements of community-wide benefit. Under a development
Packet Pg. 383
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
agreement, projects may proceed under the rules, standards, policies and regulations in
effect at the time of original project approval. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.020 Authority.
This chapter establishes procedures and requirements for development agreements . The
purposes specified in and as authorized by Article 2.5, Chapter 4, Title 7 of the Government
Code, Sections 65864 et seq. The planning commission may recommend and the city council
may enter into a development agreement for the development of real property with any
person having a legal or equitable interest in such property, as provided below. At its sole
discretion, the council may, but is not required to, approve a development agreement where
a clear public benefit or public purpose can be demonstrated. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.030 Initiation of hearings.
Hearings on a development agreement may be initiated: (A) upon the filing of an
application as provided below; or (B) by the council by a simple majority vote. (Ord. 1134
§ 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.040 Applications—Legal interest.
Any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property or such other interest as
specified in subsection (AX3)(b) of Section 17.94.070 may apply for a development
agreement, except that a person may not file, and the director shall not accept, an application
which is the same as, or substantially the same as, an application which was denied within
the previous year, unless the applicatio n is initiated by the council. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part),
1989)
17.94.050 Fees.
The council shall establish, and from time to time may amend, a schedule of fees to cover
the city’s costs of processing applications for development agreements. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part),
1989)
17.94.060 Preapplication review.
Before submitting an application and support materials, applicants shall discuss the
proposal with the community development director. At such review, the applicant should
present a preliminary site plan and show basic features of the proposed project, including
its public purposes and/or benefits. For large or complex projects, the applicant may
request council review of the preliminary concept. Such a review shall be at the council’s
sole discretion, and would allow the council to review and comment on a proposal early in
the review process. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.070 Application—Contents.
A. A development agreement application shall include the following information:
1. A planning application and processing fee;
Packet Pg. 384
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
2. The names and addresses of the applicant and of all persons having a legal or
equitable interest in all or a part of the property proposed to be used;
3. Evidence that the applicant:
a. Has a legal or equitable interest in the property involved, or
b. Has written permission from a person having a legal or equitable interest to make
such application;
4. Location of the subject property by address and vicinity map;
5. Legal description of the property, including a statement of total area involved;
6. A plan showing the location of all property included in the request for action, existing
and proposed land uses, property lines and dimensions, topography, significant
natural features, setbacks, the location of all highways, streets, a lleys and the
location and dimensions of all lots or parcels of land within a distance of three
hundred feet from the exterior boundaries of the property described in the
application;
7. Mailing list including addresses of all tenants occupying the subjec t property and
properties within three hundred feet from the subject property boundaries; and a
mailing list of owners of adjacent properties within three hundred feet from the
subject property boundaries, as shown on the county assessor’s latest available
assessment roll;
8. The proposed development agreement, together with all explanatory text, plans,
maps, drawings, pictures and other information as may be required to evaluate such
proposal, and as further described in Section 17.94.130;
9. Such other information as the director may require.
B. The director may waive the filing of one or more of the above items where the required
information is filed with an application for a rezoning, use permit, variance, subdivision
approval or other development entitlement to be considered concurrently with the
development agreement.
1. The director may reject any application that does not supply the required information,
or may reject incomplete applications.
2. The accuracy of all information, maps and lists submitted shall be the responsibility
of the applicant. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.080 Public notice.
A. Director Action. When the director certifies that the application is complete, the item
shall be scheduled for commission hearing; and the director shall give notice of the public
hearing, as provided below.
Packet Pg. 385
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
B. Manner of Giving Public Notice. Public notice requirements shall be met by:
1. Mailing or delivery to the applicant and to all owners of real property within three
hundred feet of the property included in the development agreement;
2. Mailing or delivery to all tenants of property within three hundred feet of the property
included in the development agreement;
3. Mailing to any person who has filed a written request for such notice with the planning
director, and
4. Publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published and
circulated in the city. Said notice shall be published at least ten days before the
hearing date, and shall include: (a) the time and place of the public hearing, and (b)
a general explanation of the development agreement, including the property location,
proposed land uses and applicant’s name. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.090 Failure to receive notice.
The failure to receive notice by any person entitled thereto by law or this chapter does not
affect the authority of the city to enter into a development agreement. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part),
1989)
17.94.100 Planning commission hearing and recommendation.
The commission shall consider the proposed development agreement and shall make its
recommendation to the council. The recommendation shall include whether or not the
proposed development agreement meets the following findings:
A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any
applicable specific plan;
B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other
applicable ordinances and regulations;
C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more
comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or necessary
public improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the development
agreement with the applicant; and
D. The proposed project and development agreement:
1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working in
the surrounding area;
2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent
land uses;; or
Packet Pg. 386
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
3. Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part),
1989)
17.94.110 City council hearing.
After the recommendation of the planning commission, the director shall give notice of a
public hearing the city council in the manner provided for in Section 17.94.080. (Ord. 1134
§ 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.120 City council action.
A. Referral. After it completes the public hearing and considers the commission’s
recommendation, the council may approve, conditionally approve, modify or disapprove
the proposed development agreement. The council may refer matters not previously
considered by the commission during its hearing back to the commission for review and
recommendation.
B. Approval. The development agreement may be approved if the city council makes the
findings for approval listed in Section 17.94.100 above. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.130 Development agreement—Contents.
A. Development agreements shall include the following:
1. The duration of the agreement, including a specified termination date if appropriate;
2. The uses to be permitted on the property;
3. The density or intensity of use permitted;
4. The maximum height, size and location of buildings permitted;
5. The reservation or dedication of land for public purposes to be secured, including,
but not limited to, rights-of-way, open space preservation, and public access
easements;
6. Proposed exceptions from zoning regulations or other development standard, and
findings where required;
7. The time schedule established for periodic review as required by Section 17.94.200.
B. Development agreements may also include additional terms, conditions and restrictions
in addition to those listed in subsection A of this section. These additional terms may
include, but are not limited to:
1. Development schedules providing that construction of the proposed development as
a total project or in phases be initiated and/or completed within specified time
periods;
Packet Pg. 387
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
2. The construction of public facilities required in conjunction with such development,
including but not limited to vehicular and pedestrian rights-of-way, public art and
other landscape amenities, drainage and flood-control facilities, parks and other
recreational facilities, and sewers and sewage treatment facilities;
3. Method of financing such improvements and, where applicable, reimbursement to
developer or city,
4. Prohibition of one or more uses normally listed as permitted, accessory, subject to
director’s review or subject to use permit in the zone normally allowed by right;
5. Limitations on future development or special terms or conditions under which
subsequent development approvals not included in the agreement may occur,
6. The requirement of a faithful performance bond where deemed necessary to and in
an amount deemed sufficient to guarantee the faithful performance of specified
terms, conditions, restrictions and/or requirements of the agreement. In lieu of a
bond, the applicant may deposit with the city clerk certificates of deposit or other
security acceptable to the finance director,
7. Specific design criteria for the exteriors of buildings and other structures, including
colors and materials, landscaping and signs;
8. Special yards, opens spaces, trails, staging areas, buffer areas, fences and walls,
public art, landscaping and parking facilities, including vehicular and pedestrian
ingress and egress;
9. Performance standards regulating such items as noise, vibration, smoke, dust, din,
odors, gases, garbage, heat and the prevention of glare or direct illumination of
adjacent properties;
10. Limitations on operating hours and other characteristics of operation which the
council determines could adversely affect the reasonable use and enjoyment of
surrounding properties. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (pan), 1989)
17.94.140 Development agreement—Adoption by ordinance—
Execution of contract.
A. The development agreement shall be approved by the adoption of an ordinance. Upon
the adoption of the ordinance, the city shall enter into the development agreement by the
execution thereof by the city administrative officer.
B. No ordinance shall be finally adopted and the city administrative officer shall not execute
a development agreement until it has been executed by the applicant and all other parties
to the agreement. If the applicant has not executed the agreement or agreement as
modified by the city council, and returned the executed agreement to the city clerk within
sixty days following council approval, the approval shall be deemed withdrawn, and the
council shall not finally adopt such ordinance, nor shall the city administrative officer
execute the agreement.
Packet Pg. 388
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
C. Such sixty-day time period may be extended upon approval of the council. (Ord. 1134
§ 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.150 Recordation of executed agreement.
Following the execution of a development agreement by the city administrative officer, the
city clerk shall record the executed agreement with the county recorder. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part),
1989)
17.94.160 Ordinances, regulations and requirements applicable to
development.
Development projects covered by a development agreement shall comply with the general
plan, zoning and subdivision regulations, and other applicable codes, ordinances, rules,
regulations and official policies in effect on the date of execution of the development
agreement by the city administrative officer, provided, however, that a development
agreement shall not:
A. Be construed to prevent the application of later adopted or amended ordinances, rules,
regulations and policies which do not conflict with such existing ordina nces, rules,
regulations and policies under the development agreement;
B. Prevent the approval, conditional approval or denial of subsequent development
applications pursuant to such existing or later adopted or amended ordinances, rules,
regulations and policies; or
C. Preclude the city from adopting and implementing emergency measures regarding water
or sewer deficiencies when the council determines that such action is necessary to
protect public health and safety. If such action becomes necessary, the council reserves
the right to suspend water or sewer service on an equitable basis until such deficiencies
are corrected. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.170 Subsequently enacted state and federal laws.
In the event that state or federal laws or regulations enacted after execution of a development
agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of such agreement,
the provisions of such agreement shall be deemed modified or suspended to the extent
necessary to comply with such laws or regulations. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.180 Enforcement—Continuing validity.
A. Unless and until amended or canceled in whole or in part as provided in Sections
17.94.190 or 17.94.210, a development agreement shall be enforceable by any party t o
the agreement, regardless of any change in regulations which alters or amends the
regulations applicable to the project covered by a development agreement, except as
specified in Sections 17.94.160 and 17.94.170.
Packet Pg. 389
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
B. The development agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the agreement
shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to the agreement. (Ord. 1134 § 1
(part), 1989)
17.94.190 Amendment—Time extension—Cancellation.
A development agreement may be amended, extended or canceled in whole or in part, by
mutual consent of all parties to the agreement or their successors in interest. Procedures for
amendment, time extensions or cancellation of the development agreement by mutual
consent shall be the same as provided for initiation and consideration of such agreement.
(Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.200 Review for compliance—Director’s authority.
A. Every development agreement entered into by the city council shall provide for director
review of compliance with the development agreement at time intervals as specified in
the agreement, but not less than once every twelve months.
B. The director shall determine whether the applicant or his or her successor in interest has
or has not complied with the agreement. If the director determines that the terms or
conditions of the agreement are not being met, all parties to the agreement shall be
notified by registered or certified mail, also indicating that failure to comply within a period
specified may result in legal action to enforce compliance, termination or modification of
the agreement.
C. It is the duty of the applicant or his or her successor in interest to provide evidence of
good faith compliance with the agreement to the director’s satisfaction at the time of the
director’s review. Refusal by the applicant or his or her successor in interest to provide
the required information shall be prima facie evidence of violation of such agreement.
D. If at the end of the time period established by the director, the applicant or his or her
successor in interest has failed to comply with the terms of the agreement or has not
submitted evidence substantiating such compliance, the director shall notify the city
council of his or her findings, recommending such action as he or she deems appropriate,
including legal action to enforce compliance or to terminate or modify the agreement.
(Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.210 Violation of agreement—Council review and action.
A. When the director notifies the council that a development agreement is being violated, a
public hearing shall be scheduled before the council to consider the matter. Procedures
for conduct of such hearing shall be the same as provided for initiation and consideration
of a development agreement.
B. If the council determines that the applicant or his or her successor in interest is in violation
of a development agreement, it may take one of the following actions:
1. Schedule the matter for council hearing for modification or possible termination of
the agreement. Procedures for hearing notice shall be the same as provided in
Section 17.94.080; or
Packet Pg. 390
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
2. Continue the matter for further consideration. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.220 Modification or termination for violations.
After the hearing required by Section 17.94.210 (A), the council may terminate or modify the
agreement upon finding that
A. 1. Terms, conditions and obligations of any party to the development agreement have
not been met;
2. The scope, design, intensity or environmental effects of a project were represented
inaccurately;
3. The project has been or is being built, operated or used in a manner that differs
significantly from approved plans, permits or other entitlements; or
4. Parties to the agreement have engaged in unlawful activity, or have used bad faith
in the performance of or the failure to perform their obligations under the agreement.
B. Modifications. Such remedial action may include, but is not limited to, changes to project
design or uses, operating characteristics, or necessar y on-site or off-site improvements
which are determined to be reasonably necessary to protect public health, safety or
welfare, and to correct problems caused by or related to noncompliance with the terms
of the agreement. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.230 Consequences of termination.
Upon termination of the development agreement, the owner shall otherwise comply with city
codes, regulations, development standards and other applicable laws in effect at the time of
termination of the agreement. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.240 Irregularity in proceedings.
No action, inaction or recommendation regarding the proposed development agreement shall
be held void or invalid or be set aside by a court by reason of any error, irregularity,
informality, neglect or omission as to any matter pertaining to the application, notice, finding,
record, hearing, report, recommendation, or any other matters of procedure whatsoever
unless, after an examination of the entire record, the court is of the opinion that the error was
prejudicial and that a different result would have been probable if the error had not occurred
or existed. (Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
17.94.250 Coordination of approvals.
A. Public Hearings. Where an application for a development agreement is concurrently
filed with an application for a zone change, use permit, variance, minor subdivision or
tract map, or annexation and the applications may be feasibly processed together, public
hearings may be concurrently held.
Packet Pg. 391
15
City of San Luis Obispo
Zoning Regulations March 2015
Page
B. Zoning or Subdivision Exceptions. Yards, building height, coverage, parking
requirements, density, and other design standards may be modified or relaxed during
consideration of a development agreement. The council may modify or relax
development or subdivision standards when: (1) such modification or relaxation is
otherwise allowed by this municipal code, (2) the council makes findings as required by
zoning and subdivision regulations, and (3) the council determines that such modification
or relaxation of standards is consistent with the general plan, and reasonably necessary
to allow the safe, efficient or attractive development of the subject property. (Ord. 1134
§ 1 (part), 1989)
Packet Pg. 392
15
O _______
ORDINANCE NO. #### (2017 SERIES)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING
REGULATIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE ASSOCIATED WITH
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH AN EXEMPTION FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CODE-0107-2017)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo held a study session in the
Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on March 21, 2017,
(CODE-0107-2017) and directed staff to return with amendments to the City’s Municipal Code
related to Development Agreements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on July 18,
2017, for the purpose of considering amendments to the Municipal Code relating to Development
Agreements (CODE-0107-2017); and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments are consistent with the
City’s General Plan, the purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances;
and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The activity is covered by the general rule
that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question
may have a significant effect on the environment. The activity is not subject to CEQA because the
minor amendment to the Zoning Regulations regarding Development Agreements will have no
effect on the environment; any actual Development Agreement will be subject to Chapter 17.94 of
the Zoning Regulations and CEQA. Any project associated with a Development Agreement will
undergo environmental review under CEQA and will be required to mitigate any impacts to the
maximum extent feasible.
SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following
findings:
1. The proposed amendments to the City’s Municipal Code regarding Development
Agreements are consistent with the General Plan and implement City goals and policies to
help facilitate large housing developments to increase the City’s housing supply.
2. The proposed amendments to the City’s Municipal Code will enable Development
Packet Pg. 393
15
Ordinance No. (2017 Series) Page 2
O _______
Agreements as a tool to coordinate the extensive financing, phasing, community benefits,
and mitigations measures of large, complex projects.
SECTION 3. Section 17.94.100.D of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby
amended as follows:
17.94.100 Planning commission hearing and recommendation.
The commission shall consider the proposed development agreement and shall make its
recommendation to the council. The recommendation shall include whether or not the proposed
development agreement meets the following findings:
A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any applicable
specific plan;
B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other applicable
ordinances and regulations;
C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more
comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or necessary public
improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the development agreement with
the applicant; and
D. The proposed project and development agreement:
1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working in the
surrounding area; or
2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent land
uses.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of
this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It
is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of
the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared
invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with
the ayes and noes shall be published at least five days prior to its final passage in the Tribune, a
newspaper published and circulated in said City, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration
of 30 days after its final passage. A copy of the full tex t of this ordinance shall be on file in the
Office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall
be available to any member of the public.
Packet Pg. 394
15
Ordinance No. (2017 Series) Page 3
O _______
INTRODUCED on the 18th day of July, 2017, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the______ day of______, 2017, on the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 395
15
Meeting Date: 3/21/2017
FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager
Michael Codron, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a staff report and presentation about Development Agreements.
REPORT IN BRIEF
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview and opportunity for City Council discussion
related to development agreements. This report includes an overview of State Law and locally
adopted ordinance requirements.
In general, the evolution of the Development Agreement as a land use tool is a consequence of a
larger tension between increasingly complicated land use regulations, high degree of public
engagement, and developers’ and a community’s desire for certainty.
The development process begins with the City’s General Plan. The General Plan outlines
policies that guide projects and the City’s Zoning Ordinance along with other municipal code
sections, which establish the development standards, which implement those policies. From
there, a developer comes up with a vision and secures capital from lending institutions, hires
architects and engineers to formulate plans, and employs consultants to conduct various surveys
regarding the characteristics of the land.
A developer incurs substantial debt, often spending millions of dollars on the early development
entitlement phase. These costs and activities occur prior to the developer receiving the City’s
approval to proceed with the project.
The developer then runs the risk that the municipality will enact a subsequent zoning ordinance
that renders the development infeasible. There are some statutory provisions within the
Subdivision Map Act and Planning and Zoning Law which hedge this risk but those provision
are not absolute or fully protect a development proposal from a major change in policy or zoning
code changes. A Development Agreement is a solution to the inherent uncertainty in the
development process and a means by which developers can protect their investment, a
municipality can provide certainty about public improvements and financing and address other
issues that are outside the regulatory authority of a City. Lastly, a Development Agreement is a
contract between a municipality and a property owner/developer, which provides the developer
with vested rights by freezing the existing zoning regulations and other issues applicable to a
property in exchange for public benefits. This report outlines both state and local requirements
for Development Agreements in the City of San Luis Obispo.
Packet Pg. 396
15
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study session is to provide an overview of Development Agreements in the
context of state law and Municipal Code findings required by the City of San Luis Obispo. This
study session is being held now as some of the larger residential housing projects have requested
a Development Agreement to memorialize the commitments of both the developer and the City.
A Development Agreement is a contract between a developer and a City (or County) in which
the city provides the developer with vested development rights for a defined period. In exchange
for these extra benefits, the developer is required to provide “extraordinary” public or
“community” benefits that exceed what the City could otherwise constitutionally require through
the normal process of exercising its land use regulation authority (these are “police powers”
delegated to local government by the state) in establishing conditions of approval for a project.
Development Agreements are a unique planning tool authorized by statute pursuant to
Government Code section 65864 – 65869.5. In some circumstances, Development Agreements
can provide both greater flexibility and greater certainty in the development of large or complex
projects, particularly those projects where development occurs in phases over many years.
However, it should be noted that Development Agreements are legislative acts and subject to
referendum, so the flexibility afforded by the tool is limited by community norms and values.
Required Terms
According with State law, a Development Agreement must include the following terms:
1. Duration of Agreement
Depending on the scope of the development, Development Agreements typically have a term
of 10-20 years. Nothing in the authorizing legislation prohibits a shorter or longer term. It
may also include a provision that will extend the term in the event of litigation that seeks to
challenge the approval of the Development Agreement for the period equal to the length of
the time from initiation of litigation until final and non-appealable resolution. The duration
clause can also include a “stale date”, or a timeframe for commencing the Project, which, if
exceeded, results in expiration of the Development Agreement.
Developers will often seek as long a term as possible while the City’s interest is o ften in
incentivizing construction of the project as soon as possible. While it is important to be
flexible, the duration of a Development Agreement should generally equal an adequate time
for remaining pre-development efforts (e.g. engineering, design, financing, etc.),
construction, and marketing.
Accordingly, a large project that involves multiple phases such as Avila Ranch and San Luis
Ranch will likely proceed under a multi-year period of construction should have a matching
extended duration (e.g. 15 to 20 years). Setting an appropriate duration matched to a realistic
forecast of project development prevents developers from obtaining vested entitlements
solely for enhancing property value. Provisions for subsequently amending (lengthening) the
term can be included in the event of unforeseen circumstances, such as an intermittent or
persistent real estate market downturn.
Packet Pg. 397
15
2. Permitted Uses of the Property
Development Agreements are not “regulatory documents”, they simply provide the
Developer with a vested right for the term of the Agreement to use the property for the
permitted uses, pursuant to adopted land use regulations (i.e., General Plan and zoning
regulations) subject only to the procedures for review of individual projects. Development
Agreements can both shorten or lengthen the term associated with entitlements.
3. Density/Maximum Height and Size of Buildings
Development Agreements provide the Developer with a vested right for the term of the
agreement to build to the approved density, height and size of buildings; subject only to the
procedures for review of individual building projects (i.e. ARC and CHC reviews).
Commonly, an adopted Specific Plan1 or other regulatory documents are included in the
Development Agreement by reference, which is the case of the larger pending housing
projects for Avila and San Luis Ranches.
4. Provisions for Reservation or Dedication of Land for Public Purposes
Development Agreements set forth the developer’s obligations to dedicate and/or improve
property for open space and community facilities. They typically describe all of the proposed
public land dedications and level of improvements and obligate the developer to improve the
land and dedicate it to the local government in accordance with a phasing plan.
Optional Terms
In addition, to the mandatory terms required by state law set forth above, Development
Agreements typically include terms regarding the following matters:
1. Infrastructure Required
Development Agreements typically describe the developer’s obligations f or construction of
infrastructure2, including but also beyond those required by the subdivision map(s) such as
improvements for streets and sidewalks, parks and recreation facilities, stormwater
management and wetlands, grading and floodplain management, storm drain, sanitary sewer,
domestic and recycled water infrastructure, electricity, gas and telecommunications
improvements, and transit. In the case of the two pending developments, it will be important
that the Development Agreement clearly link not only required mitigations and policies, but
also delineate improvements being funded that are beyond the fair share requirements of the
developer and articulate when, how and if the developer will be reimbursed for these
supernumerary improvements.
2. Affordable Housing
Development Agreements typically set forth the developer’s obligation to provide affordable
housing and other public benefits. The Development Agreement can specify the percentage
of affordable and market rate units, the level of affordability, and tenure mix (rental vs. for
sale). Moreover, the Development Agreement can require the delivery of units in terms of
phases. Since the Development Agreement is voluntary, this can include inclusionary
requirements on residential rental units.
1 Both Avila and San Luis Ranches are areas included in existing or new Specific Plan areas.
2 This includes infrastructure required by policy, development standards or through environmental mitigation.
Packet Pg. 398
15
3. Fees and Exactions
Development Agreements typically specify the types and amounts of fees and exactions that
will apply to the project and the terms related to updating of any such fees, i.e., will the
project be subject to such future increases or be “grandfathered”.
4. Infrastructure Financing
Some portion of the public improvements may be financed through land secured public
financing, such as formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD), use of Tax Increment
Financing (TIF), such as an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD), or other
sources of public investment. The Development Agreement typically includes a financing
plan as an exhibit that specifies the form and mechanism of public financing to be used and
the obligations of the local government and the developer to implement and use the sources
of public financing. Such provisions typically obligate the local agency to create and
administer the financing mechanism(s) and provide other funding sources as may be
specified.
5. Responsibility for CEQA Mitigation and other Mitigation Measures
Development Agreements typically incorporate all applicable CEQA mitigation measures
adopted by the local government in conjunction with the project approvals. Other mitigation
requirements, for example any measures adopted to offset any negative fiscal effects of the
project can be included in a Development Agreement.
Terms Involving the Development Process
1. Phasing
Development Agreements typically require the developer construct certain improvements (in
addition to those “in-tract” improvements required pursuant to the subdivision map(s) and
they commonly include plans for phasing pursuant to which the developer agrees to provide
the identified infrastructure and community facilities concurrent with the discrete phases of
the project. The required phasing of private development and public improvements is
typically monitored and enforced through the subdivision map process, whereby tentative
map applications would have to be consistent with the approved phasing plan, infrastructure
plan and development standards and guidelines.
It is also the case that project phasing can be arranged such that aspects of the project desired
by the local government are “deferred” until a latter phase of the project, raising questions
about whether there will be the motivation to actually complete this later phase. Remedies
may need to be included to address a potential outcome that could limit desired public
benefits.
2. Subdivision Maps
Development Agreements may allow subdivision map approvals associated with the project
to extend through the full term of the Development Agreement, particularly if the developer
obtains a “master subdivision map” with subsequent phased tentative and final maps. Any
special terms related to such extensions can be included.
Packet Pg. 399
15
3. Subsequent Approvals
Development Agreements typically set forth the approval process for individual projects.
For example, all individual projects could be required to submit a final package of materials,
including a site plan, building location, floor plans, exterior materials and colors, overall
vertical dimension, hardscape and landscape concepts, vertical dimensions and fenestration
for review pursuant to adopted design standards and guidelines.
Other Standard Terms and Conditions
Development Agreements typically include a common set of terms that are not expressly
required by the State law, these include:
1. Assignment and Transfers
The developer may transfer the property (or portions of the property) and the rights and
responsibilities of the Development Agreement will “run with the land”. However, at the
same time, the Development Agreement should require the original owner to remain fully
responsible for all developer obligations under the Development Agreement (e.g.,
construction of infrastructure and obligation for public benefits), unless the local government
is satisfied that the new owner(s) can meet these obligations. Typical assignment clauses give
local agencies the right to review and approve such assignments, based on its qualifications
and experience of the assignee.
2. Annual Review
By law, Development Agreements must require an annual review of the developer’s
compliance with its obligations under the Development Agreement, which may be at an
administrative level, or at a public hearing.
3. Indemnification
Development Agreements typically indemnify the local agency from any legal action taken
by a third party against the project at any time and for any reason, saving negligence by the
local agency.
4. Vested Rights
Development Agreements may provide that the local government will not enact any
ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, ballot initiative, or other measure applicable to the Project
which would adversely affects the rate, type, manner, timing or sequencing of the
development or construction of the Project or which would otherwise conflict with the scope
of the Project set forth in the Agreement. It may also provide that the local government’s
regulations governing the permitted uses, design, and construction standards and
specifications applicable to the development will be those in force as of the adoption date of
the Development Agreement. However, uniform building codes, typically resulting from
state law, will always be those in effect at the time of approval of the applicable building,
grading or other construction permits.
5. Investor and Mortgagee Protection
Development Agreements typically include terms for the benefit of any equity investors or
commercial lenders that may be involved in the project, such as the right to notice of defaults
Packet Pg. 400
15
and an ability to cure defaults.
6. Public Benefits
The public benefits offered by the developer or sought by the City will ultimately bear some
relationship to the value of the project; the developer will need to rationalize the additional
cost of these public benefits into their overall project economics. However, as a general
measure, the public benefits offered should meet or exceed the estimated value of the vested
entitlement to the developer combined with the estimated City cost of any terms conferring
additional benefit to the developer (e.g. fee relief). Because of varying financial
circumstances including such factors as the developer’s basis in the land, current economic
conditions, and site assembly and preparation costs the financial feasibility will vary.
Stronger, more feasible projects will have greater capacity and willingness to fund public
benefits while less feasible projects, including those with considerable merit, will have a
lesser ability to fund extraordinary public benefits. Accordingly, there can be no precise
generalized metric regarding “ability to pay”. While the following factors can help frame the
matter and assure that the City’s request for public benefits are at least “in the ball park”, the
amount of public benefit will always result for analysis of the particular case and the related
negotiation with the developer.
a. Overall project value
The extraordinary public benefits required as a part of a development agreement will
ultimately be a project cost, in one fashion or another. As such, they will affect project
economics in the same way as development impact fees and other project mitigation costs
that may be imposed on the project. Generally, a “rule of thumb” or industry standard is
that aggregate infrastructure and off-site mitigation costs should not exceed 15 percent of
total project retail value.
Under certain circumstances, this percentage could be a bit higher, but there are also
circumstances where it may be too high. In order to do this calculation, it is necessary to
compute the total aggregate burden of impact fees, other infrastructure costs, and other
mitigation and compare the result with estimated project retail value. If there is some
remaining capacity, it can provide an indicator of what may be reasonable in terms of
negotiating public benefits. The City is currently evaluating these factors in the current
Development Agreement being negotiated for the San Luis Ranch and Avila Ranch
Projects.
7. Enforcement
Enforcement is a key element of a Development Agreement in the event of non-performance
by either the Developer or a City or County. Accountability and enforcement terms can
include bonding requirements, encumbrances of title, mechanisms in the event of default,
including reverter clauses, and other contractual cure provisions. Enforcement provisions are
a critical component of a Development Agreement and should be required if the project does
not proceed as planned and approved.
Packet Pg. 401
15
Locally Adopted Requirements
The City adopted Municipal Code Chapter 17.94 in 1989 to establish procedures and
requirements for development agreements for the purposes of specifying 25 policy areas largely
related to application requirements, findings, public hearing requirements, administration, and
relationship to other approvals and entitlements. The primary purpose is to codify local
requirements related to Development Agreements to compliment the state framework that
established the statutory authority for Development Agreements.
The City has approved one Development Agreement that was overturned by referendum along
with other entitlements related to the San Luis Ranch Property. The City does not have any
current Development Agreements and the codified framework provides a useful foundation for
the local processing of any agreements.
The approval process for Development Agreements is established by the City’s Municipal Code.
The process requires the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council,
in consideration of the following findings:
A. The proposed development agreement is consistent with the general plan and any
applicable specific plan;
B. The proposed development agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other
applicable ordinances and regulations;
C. The proposed development agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more
comprehensive land use planning, and provides substantial public benefits or
necessary public improvements, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the
development agreement with the applicant; and
D. The proposed project and development agreement:
1. Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working
in the surrounding area;
2. Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent
land uses; or
3. Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
(Ord. 1134 § 1 (part), 1989)
It should be noted that Draft Environmental Impact Reports are being circulated for both Avila
Ranch and San Luis Ranch for public review. Both reports conclude that there will be significant
adverse impacts on the environment even after all reasonable and feasible mitigation measures
are implemented. These two pending projects both propose to use Development Agreement in
order to coordinate the extensive financing, phasing, and environmental mitigations associated
with these projects. The inability to use a Development Agreement would be a significant
drawback for the City in terms of addressing the complicated planning and financing issues that
are associated with these projects.
The City’s municipal code requirements that projects not have a significant adverse impact is
significantly more constraining than required under state law and will otherwise limit a very
useful planning tool to coordinate the extensive planning, infrastructure and financing issues that
are generally within the scope and purpose of a Development Agreement. To that extent, Staff
is requesting direction if the City should pursue ordinance changes to require any project
Packet Pg. 402
15
associated with a Development Agreement to mitigate impacts to the maximum extent feasible
as required under CEQA.
Questions for City Council direction
Does the City Council support the use of Development Agreements?
1. Does the City Council conceptually support the use of Development
Agreements as outlined in this report?
2. What specific concerns or issues does the City Council have with
Development Agreements?
3. What are examples of public benefits that the Council believes are
generally required to support the use of a Development Agreement?
4. Are there any other details related to Development Agreements that the
City Council wants Staff to consider when negotiating?
Municipal Code requirements
1. Does the City Council want staff to return with any recommended changes
to the City’s Municipal Code to facilitate the use of Development
Agreements for complex housing projects that may have remaining
adverse impacts; even after all reasonable and feasible mitigation
measures have been imposed?
2. Are there any other changes to the City’s Municipal Code that the Council
wants to make in order to address any concerns?
CONCURRENCES
The Public Works and Utilities Departments support the use of Development Agreements to
specify fair share responsibilities and to ensure that infrastructure phasing occurs in conjunction
with planned development.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
No action is being requested and Development Agreements for individual projects are subject to
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is a variety of financial objectives related to including a Development Agreement as part
of the entitlement package for any project. A primary purpose is to clearly articulate both the
City and developer’s financial responsibilities and because a Development Agreement is
voluntary in nature, it provides a mechanism for the City to require improvements or other
remuneration that is not otherwise required by policy, development standard or any required
mitigations.
Development Agreements should be evaluated within the City’s financial policies and
appreciation for comprehensive fiscal impacts. If infrastructure financing is sought as part of a
Development Agreement, comprehensive debt capacity should be viewed as shared resource by
Packet Pg. 403
15
all of the local governments serving the development area.
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council could decide not to use Development Agreements as a planning tool. This is
not recommended since there are currently two projects moving forward: Avila Ranch and San
Luis Ranch. The projects should be evaluated based on the General Plan and public
infrastructure financed through the City’s fiscal policies, which include land based financing.
The City Council also adopted a Major City Goal to continue to implement the City’s Fiscal
Responsibility Philosophy with a focus on economic development and responsiveness,
structurally balanced fiscal outlook, unfunded liabilities, and infrastructure financing. Through a
Development Agreement, land based financing will be evaluated in accordance with the City’s
financial policies.
Attachments:
a - Council Reading File - Development Agreement
Packet Pg. 404
15
Meeting Date: 7/18/2017
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Utilities Deputy Director - Water
Mychal Boerman, Water Resources Program Manager
SUBJECT: MODIFICATION OF CORPORATION YARD WELL PERMIT FEE AND
ACCESS
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 10629 (2015 Series) to:
1. Restrict public access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well to outside-City properties
on O’Connor Way, West Foothill Boulevard, and neighboring areas for non-potable use
only;
2. Update permit fee for access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well; and
3. Terminate public access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well on July 1, 2018.
DISCUSSION
Corporation Yard Well History
The Corporation Yard well was established during the
drought of 1987-1991 to serve as an alternative source
of water for construction-related activities (prior to the
City’s recycled water program which began delivering
water in 2006). Over the years, word spread about the
well and it began to see more use. It became known
that people outside of the City were using the well for
non-potable uses such as laundry, livestock, irrigation,
and toilet flushing.
In June 2015, when the City Council declared a local
drought emergency, guidelines were established and a
permit fee was identified for the use of the
Corporation Yard well. Access to the well for non-
City residents was permitted in an effort to provide
temporary support to areas of the San Luis Obispo
Valley Groundwater Basin (SLOVGB) that were
experiencing depleted groundwater levels as a result
of the drought. The June 2015 Council Agenda Report on the drought noted that upon rescission
of the drought emergency, the well would be shut down and would no longer be available for
public use. The permit application form emphasized that “Public use of the well will be
discontinued when the drought emergency is rescinded by the City Council.”
Packet Pg. 405
16
On June 20, 2017, the City Council voted to rescind the local drought emergency declaration and
directed staff to return with modifications to the Corporation Yard well permit program allowing
for a temporary extension of limited public access to the well for no more than one year. City
Council directed staff to update the permit fee for access to the well to be commensurate with the
adopted City water rates and to restrict access to the well to properties on West Foothill
Boulevard, Cottonwood, and O’Connor Way.
Approved Use Areas
The original Corporation
Yard non-potable well permit
program was offered to any
properties within the
SLOVGB. At the June 20,
2017 City Council meeting,
residents of the O’Connor
Way area testified that their
wells had not sufficiently
recovered from the drought
and they were still dependent
on access to the Corporation
Yard well for basic residential
needs (such as laundry and
toilet flushing). Based on this testimony, the City Council provided direction to restrict access to
the Corporation Yard well to properties on O’Connor Way, West Foothill Boulevard, and
neighboring areas. Council directed staff to prepare a letter to the Board of Supervisors
informing them of the actions taken by the City Council. City Council stated the expectation that
residents in this County area work with County and City staff to develop a solution that would
result in the cessation of the use of the Corporation Yard well by July 1, 2018. Additionally, staff
was to inform Council on progress.
Updated Permit Fees
By estimating Corporation Yard well water use by the 15 permit holders around West Foothill
Boulevard and O’Connor Way that were registered in 2015-16 and 2016-17, staff developed an
annual access fee of $1,510. As directed by Council, this proposed fee was developed using
similar pricing metrics to those that City residents pay, such as a monthly base-fee, an account
set-up fee, and consumption based charges. Water use for each permitted parcel was estimated to
be 330 gallons per day or 110 gallons per capita daily. This assumes that each property is
occupied by three people which is consistent with census estimates for unincorporated areas of
San Luis Obispo County. Estimated use of 110 gallons per capita daily is also consistent with
water use in local communities. Using this methodology, approximately 75% of the use of the
Corporation Yard well could be attributed to use in or around O ’Connor Way. This level of use
would equate to roughly 5.5 acre-feet of water demand from the O’Connor Way area annually.
Table 1: Outside-City Permits
2015-16 & 2016-17
Outside-City Permits
Year
Inside-
City
Permits
Non-
O’Connor/West
Foothill
O’Connor/
West Foothill Total
15/16 25 4 15 44
16/17 25 4 15 44
Packet Pg. 406
16
O’Connor Way/West Foothill Water Demand
Estimated Demand Estimated # of
Permits Annual Acre-Feet/Permit
Annual
Billing
Units/Permit
5.5125 Acre-Feet 15 0.37 160
Note: A billing unit is 748 gallons of water
O’Connor Way/West Foothill Corporation Yard Well Proposed Fee
Account Setup Fee Annual Base Fee Consumption Fee Total
Fee/Permit
$83.00 $148.00 $1,279.00 $1,510.00
Note: The consumption fee is calculated by multiplying estimated O’Connor Way/West Foothill Boulevard water
use (160 Billing Units/Permit/Year) by the City’s existing water rates.
CONCURRENCES
The Community Development Department concurs with the recommendations made in this
report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed modification of Resolution No. 10629 related to the use of the Corporation Yard
non-potable well is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
because the action does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a
potentially significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14,
California Code of Regulations, Section 15378. Even if the contemplated action is a project
under CEQA, it is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15301, existing
facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed permit fee will cover costs associated with program management, staffing, and
costs related to electricity and pump maintenance for the Corporation Yard well. Additionally,
the permit fee, based on water use estimates, is aligned with in-city water user costs. If fifteen
permits were purchased at the updated fee amount, the City would recover $22,650.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Allow access to Corporation Yard well to all properties within the SLOVGB who
are located outside of City-limits. The Council could elect to allow permitted access to
the Corporation Yard well to properties located within the SLOVGB and outside of the
O’Connor Way area. Of the 19 total outside-City permits currently issued, four are
located outside the O’Connor Way area. These properties are in the Edna Valley and
Orcutt area. The overall groundwater status of wells in these areas is unknown.
Packet Pg. 407
16
2. Double of proposed consumption and base fee portions of well permit fee. The
Council could elect to double the base fee and consumption charges of the proposed well
permit fee commensurate with other agreements to furnish water to customers outside of
the City limits. Doubling base-fees and consumption charges would make the annual fee
$3,020 for each user.
Attachments:
a - Resolution 10629 Establishing a Permit Fee and Regulations for Use of the Corporation
Yard Non-Potable Well
b - 2017 Reso amending well rules
Packet Pg. 408
16
RESOLUTION NO. 10629 (2015 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A PERMIT FEE AND
REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF THE CORPORATION YARD NON -
POTABLE WELL
WHEREAS, as evidenced by Governor Edmund G. Brown's various proclamations,
California is in a state of emergency due to severe drought conditions; and
WHEREAS, separate but related to the drought, the State of California has adopted
legislation commonly referred to as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which
requires, among other thing, that a groundwater management agencies must be formed to
manage the groundwater basins underlying the agency's respective jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo's ( "City ") water supply is composed of surface
water stored in the Whale Rock, Salinas, and Nacimiento reservoirs which are located outside of
the City's limits but within the County of San Luis Obispo. In addition to these surface water
supplies, the City owns and operates a non - potable well located at the City's Corporation Yard.
The well draws groundwater from the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin which has
been identified by the California Department of Water Resources as a medium priority basin as
part of the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program (Water Code
section 10920 et seq.); and
WHEREAS, the original purpose of this well was for use at construction sites within the
City; and
WHEREAS, over time, water from the well has been used by individuals and
commercial enterprises for a variety of purposes not regulated by the City; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of the drought and the importance of the groundwater
resources management, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, it is necessary
for the City to regulate the use of the groundwater well at the City's Corporation yard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Resolution is categorically exempt
from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15307 (Actions by Regulatory
Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources).
SECTION 2. During the City's declared drought emergency, a permit issued by the City
Utilities Department will be required prior to any person obtaining water from the non - potable
groundwater well at the City's Corporation yard. Water from this well may only be used for non-
potable purposes for properties within the City of San Luis Obispo or those adjacent to or within
the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin as defined in Bulletin 118 issued by the
R 10629
Packet Pg. 409
16
Resolution No. 10629 (2015 Series)
Page 2
California Department of Water Resources. Guidelines for the allowable uses of the water, user
eligibility and application procedures consistent with this Resolution will be developed by the
Utilities Director. The Utilities Director will have the authority to modify the guidelines, user
eligibility and application procedures based on the severity of the drought conditions. If traffic
issues, safety, abuses, or other similar concerns related to the well occur, the use and operation of
the well may be further regulated or shut down at the discretion of the Utilities Director.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby adopts the following annual fees for use of the
non - potable groundwater well at the City's Corporation yard by user type:
Property owner inside the City limits: 50.00
Property owner outside the City limits,
but in the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin: $350.00
SECTION 4. Failure to follow the guidelines or follow other applicable procedures for
use of the water will result in revocation of the user permit and forfeiture of access to the well.
Upon motion of Vice Mayor Ashbaugh, seconded by Council Member Christianson, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Carpenter, Christianson and Rivoire,
Vice Mayor Ashbaugh and Mayor Marx
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of June 2015.
Z fttal
Ma or a Marx
ATTEST:
Packet Pg. 410
16
Resolution No. 10629 (2015 Series)
Page 3
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this S4'- day of 7
ony J. M " ,
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 411
16
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2017 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY’S PERMIT FEE AND USER REGULATIONS
FOR THE USE OF THE CORPORATION YARD NON-POTABLE WELL
WHEREAS, the City owns and operates a non-potable groundwater well (the “Well”)
located at the City’s corporation yard;
WHEREAS, the original purpose of the Well was for construction purposes; and
WHEREAS, over time, the Well has been used by individuals and commercial enterprises
for a variety of purposes not regulated by the City; and
WHEREAS, on June 2, 2015, the City adopted Resolution No. 10629 (2015 Series)
formally establishing a permit fee and use regulations for the Well. Specifically, the Resolution
limited the use of the Well for non-potable purposes for individuals and properties who are located
within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. Use of the Well under Resolution No.
10629 was limited to the period when a drought emergency was declared; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2017, the City Council formally rescinded the declared drought
emergency but directed staff to develop a plan to restrict public access to the Well, update the well
permit fee, and work with the County of San Luis Obispo and properties participating in the
program to develop a solution that would result in cessation of the use of the well by July 1, 2018.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. A permit will be required to obtain water from the groundwater well at the
City’s Corporation Yard. Guidelines for the allowable uses of the water, user eligibility and
application procedures will be developed by the Utilities Director and will be consistent with this
Resolution. The Utilities Director will have the authority to modify the guidelines, user eligibility
and application procedures.
SECTION 2. Access to the Corporation Yard non-potable well is hereby limited to non-
potable use for properties located within areas bounded by O’Connor Way and West Foothill as
outlined in the map attached as Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. The annual fee for each property to access and use the well is $1,510.00.
SECTION 4. Failure to follow the guidelines or follow other applicable procedures for
use of the water will result in revocation of the user permit and permanent forfeiture of access to
the well.
SECTION 5. Public access to the well will be terminated on July 1, 2018 unless other
action is taken by the City Council prior to this date.
Packet Pg. 412
16
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 2
SECTION 6. Resolution 10629 (2015 Series) is hereby superseded to the extent
inconsistent herewith.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2017.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 413
16
Resolution No. _____ (2017 Series) Page 3
Exhibit A
Packet Pg. 414
16