HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 10 - COUNCIL READING FILE_i_Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (2)INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For EID-1484-2018 / SBVD-1483-2018, ARCH-1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018
1.Project Title:
“Northwest Corner” (NWC) Broad & Tank Farm Mixed-Use Commercial / Assisted-Living Center including
Vesting Tentative Map #3115
2.Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3.Contact Person and Phone Number:
Brandi Cummings, Contract Planner Tyler Corey
brandi.cummings@swca.com (805) 786-2550 tcorey@slocity.org (805) 781-7169
4.Project Location:
3985 Broad Street and 660 Tank Farm Road
5.Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
NKT Development, LLC and Westmont Development, LP
c/o C. M. Florence, AICP
Oasis Associates, Inc.
3427 Miguelito Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
6.General Plan Designations:
Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay, Business Park, and Conservation Open Space.
7.Zoning:
Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay and Specific Plan Overlay (C-C-SF-SP) and Airport Area
Specific Plan Designations: Business Park with Airport Area Specific Plan Overlay (BP-SP) and Conservation
Open Space with Airport Area Specific Plan Overlay (C/OS-SP).
8.Description of the Project:
The applicant is proposing a five (5)-lot subdivision on two parcels with a combined area of approximately 10.07
acres. A General Plan amendment, Airport Area Specific Plan amendment, and rezone would change the
designations of the project site to Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay (C-C-SF-SP). Lot 1 of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) 3115 would be developed with an assisted living and memory care facility
on 4.79 acres. No application has been submitted for development on Lots 2 through 5, but the applicant has
indicated that they would be developed with a commercial center on 5.28 acres subject to future review and
entitlement actions. The project site is located within the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) located at 3985
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 2
Broad Street and 660 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs]:
053-421-003 and -004). The 10.07-acre property is currently developed with a single-family residence at 660
Tank Farm Road, while 3985 Broad Street is currently vacant (Attachment 2, project plans).
Figure 1: Regional Location
Figure 2: Project Vicinity, Site and Zoning Designations
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 3
The applicant is requesting a General Plan amendment to change the land use designation of parcel 053-421-004
from Business Park (BP) to Community Commercial (C-C), an Airport Area Specific Plan amendment to change
the specific plan designation of both parcels from Business Park (BP) to Community Commercial (C-C), and a
rezone to change the zoning designation of parcel 053-421-004 from Business Park (BP) to Community
Commercial (C-C-SF-SP). These changes would allow for a wide range of retail sales and personal services that
serve communitywide needs within the context of distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers which may
accommodate larger scale uses not appropriate in the Downtown Core. The existing Conservation/Open Space
(C/OS) designations along the creek corridor along the western property line would remain.
The amendments would allow for the development of an assisted living facility and memory care facility
(Westmont Living) that would occupy the westerly portion of the project site and would include 139 living units
and support/administrative space in a 133,656 square-foot, two-story independent building, serving residents of
60 years in age and older. Westmont Living would be a retirement community that provides a spectrum of living
options. State licensing is required to operate an assisted living and memory care facility. However, the level of
assisted service is tailored to the individual needs of each resident. This allows each resident to “age in place”
rather than relocate as their service needs change. Based on Westmont Living’s proposed operations,
approximately 50% of residents would be considered independent living. This would include residents of the
community that do not require Assistance with Daily Living (“ADL”) Services. The other 50% of residents would
require some form of assistance, such as medication reminders, dressing or bathing assistance, transportation or
mobility utilizing the assistance services or are memory care residents.
No entitlements are being sought at this time for development of the eastern portion of the project site. However,
the applicant has indicated that a future development project would likely include a commercial center consisting
of a medical office and retail/restaurant space. Conceptual site plans show that the proposed medical office would
likely be a 45,000 square-foot independent detached building located near the SESLOC property to the north. The
medical office would likely house the Dignity Health Comprehensive Cancer Center, an outpatient cancer
treatment and education center. The proposed retail/restaurant development may consist of three buildings for
retail or restaurant use totaling 15,000 square feet in three (3) independent detached buildings (5,000 square feet
each). To facilitate potential future California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) streamlining when a
development project application is submitted for the eastern portion of the project site, this environmental
document analyzes the potential environmental effects of possible future development projects that could be
allowed by the General Plan amendment, Airport Area Specific Plan Amendment, and rezone, including the
conceptual plan for the commercial center, as discussed above. However, this analysis is not conducted on a
project-specific level since development plans and details may change.
The conceptual site plan for the commercial center is configured with retail/restaurant buildings along the
southeastern corner of the site, adjacent to the Tank Farm-Broad Street intersection. The proposed medical office
would be located at the northeast corner of the site, across from SESLOC and fronting Broad Street. Parking
would primarily be located at the interior of the site, between the commercial center uses and the Westmont Living
facility. Additional parking for the Westmont Living facility would be located west of the building, parallel to
Orcutt Creek.
Project construction would begin with mass grading of the entire project site followed by development of the
Westmont Living development. The Westmont Living facility would be phased, with 72 assisted living suites and
28 memory care studio units in the first phase and 39 assisted living suites in the second phase. Any development
proposed on the eastern portion of the project would require review and approval for the appropriate entitlements
based on the proposed uses of the commercial center and the project’s consistency with the General Plan, Airport
Area Specific Plan, zoning regulations, and this environmental document, or subsequent environmental analysis.
Additional proposed project components include:
1.A five-lot subdivision, including four commercial lots ranging in size from 0.69 acre to 2.68 acres, and
one assisted living and memory care site of 4.79 acres;
2.The Westmont Living facility would include 111 assisted living units. Of these, approximately 50 - 60%
would be independent living, with the balance being assisted living. The facility would also include 28
memory care beds. The facility would be constructed in two phases as follows:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 4
a.Phase 1 - 72 assisted living units and 28 memory care beds comprising 98,473 square feet
(49,610 sf 1st floor, 48,863 sf 2nd floor) in a single building. Phase 1 parking and site
improvements would consist of 70 parking spaces;
b.Phase 2 - 39 assisted units comprising 35,183 square feet (17,764 sf 1st floor, 17,418 sf 2nd floor)
in an expanded building attached to the main Phase 1 development;
3.Assisted living amenities at the site would include full meal services, entertainment and exercise rooms,
movie theater, and beauty-barber services;
4.As a 24-hour operation, the Westmont Living facility is expected to employ approximately 80 full- and
part-time staff. At any given time, as many as 18 employees would be on site for a given shift;
5.The Westmont Living facility would include various delivery receiving and service needs throughout
each day, and would accommodate family and guest visitors throughout each day;
6.Assisted living parking is proposed at 70 parking spaces dedicated to residents and staff;
7.Proposed uses, building and lot sizes, and associated parking on each lot are shown in Table 1, below.
Table 1: Project Statistics
Lot Use Lot Size
(acres)
Building
floor area
(sf)
Building
footprint
(sf)
Vehicle
spaces
provided
Bicycle
parking
provided
Lot 1 Assisted living and
memory care 4.79 133,655 77,750 70
6 short-
term
5 long-
term
Lot 2 Retail/ Restaurant1 0.69 5,0001 5,0001
Lot 3 Retail/ Restaurant1 0.98 5,0001 5,0001
Lot 4 Retail/ Restaurant1 0.93 5,0001 5,0001
Lot 5 Medical Office1 2.68 45,0001 17,9921
1) No application for development has been submitted for lots 2-5. Future development would require additional review and
entitlement actions. This statistic represents one possible development scenario for the lot based on conceptual information
from the applicant.
8.Demolition of the existing single-family residence at 660 Tank Farm Road;
9.Amendment to the Airport Area Specific Plan to modify the land use designation from Business Park
with Specific Plan Overlay (BP-SP) to Community Commercial with Special Focus Area and Specific
Plan Overlay (C-C-SF-SP) and associated text amendments to update the Specific Plan consistent with
the proposed project and Special Focus Area policies (Attachment 1);
10.General Plan Amendment and rezone for the 1.37-acre parcel at 660 Tank Farm Road modifying the land
use designation from Business Park to Community Commercial and the Zoning Designation from
Business Park (BP-SP) to Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay (C-C-SF-SP);
11.Creek setback exception to encroach into approximately 4,963 square-feet of the setback area for road
improvements;
12.Design Exception for Tank Farm Road frontage improvements to allow 11-foot vs. 12-foot-wide travel
lanes; and
13.Frontage and on-site improvements (Attachment 2, Project Plans).
Two points of access from Tank Farm Road are proposed via a north-south driveway that would be shared between
the office/retail/restaurant portion and the assisted living portion of the site, and a signalized intersection at the
Mindbody intersection that would connect to the Industrial Way/Broad Street signalized intersection. Access from
Broad Street would be provided by a driveway located along the northerly property line. This driveway would
also provide access to the SESLOC Federal Credit Union building to the north. The existing right-in/right-out
driveway access to SESLOC from Broad Street would be eliminated. Also requested is a design exception for the
travel lanes on Tank Farm Road, which seeks 11-foot vehicle lanes versus the 12-foot lanes required by the Airport
Area Specific Plan (AASP). The proposed street frontage improvements for both Tank Farm Road and Broad
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 5
Street consist of curb, gutters, sidewalks, and parkways along the project frontages as depicted in the AASP. The
Broad Street frontage improvements have been designed to accommodate a future transit stop.
The proposed two-story, 32-foot-high Westmont Living facility building’s design would incorporate an
architectural style and materials consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. The color palette would be neutral,
and materials would consist of a mix of Alumawood, Hardie siding, stucco, board and batten, and stone. The
Westmont Living facility design would incorporate use of simple shed roof forms, and board & batten and lap
siding, with the intent to provide complementary forms and materials. (Project plans, Attachment 2)
The proposed project has been designed to collect stormwater runoff from the proposed buildings, landscaping,
parking and drive aisles, and direct the water into underground storage facilities as a strategy to address current
post-construction stormwater regulations. The impervious areas on site have been designed with gradients to direct
stormwater through a storm drain system that would route the stormwater to the two proposed underground storage
facilities.
The project is seeking a creek setback exception to encroach into approximately 4,963 square-feet of the setback
area for road improvements. To minimize potential impacts to 0.19 acre of seasonal wetland and ephemeral
drainage area through project design, the project includes the enhancement of approximately 0.06 acres of wetland
along the Orcutt Creek corridor, which would constitute a 3:1 replacement ratio. The enhancement plan provides
for the removal of invasive non-native species and planting of native plants in the northwest corner of the site and
creek setback areas along Orcutt Creek (see Attachment 3, Biological Wetland Resource Assessment).
9.Project History:
The proposed project was originally submitted in March 2018 and included a seven-lot subdivision, an assisted
living and memory care facility, a retail grocery store use, and six retail/restaurant spaces. That project was
reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission on July 25, 2018 and September 19, 2018 and received an Airport
Land Use Plan consistency determination. On October 15, 2018, the Architectural Review Commission reviewed
the project and sent its recommendations to the Planning Commission, which reviewed the project on April 10,
2019. The Planning Commission’s recommendation was introduced initially to the City Council on May 7, 2019.
A second hearing did not occur and neither the project nor the environmental document was approved.
The applicant has since revised the project and is only moving forward with the Westmont Living facility at this
time. The assisted living and memory care facility remains as originally proposed, with no changes. The applicant
has indicated that future development of the eastern portion of the project site would include replacing the
proposed grocery store use with a medical office and reducing the amount of proposed retail/restaurant space. A
conceptual site plan of a potential future development shows that the configuration of structures on the commercial
portion of the property would be altered.
The applicant is seeking to proceed with the Westmont Living facility and commercial center as two separate
projects, though both are analyzed herein. As no changes are proposed to Westmont Living facility, that project
can proceed with a final City Council hearing, as this part of the project is still consistent with the previous review
of the Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission. As part of approving this environmental
document, the City Council would also be approving the environmental analysis of the commercial center, and
the vesting tentative tract map to subdivide the site. The commercial center is being processed as a separate
entitlement and will require a separate Architectural Review Commission review and Planning Commission
approval. When the commercial center project subsequently returns to Architectural Review Commission and
Planning Commission, no further environmental review would be required and a consistency determination could
be made (assuming the application is generally consistent with the conceptual plans for the commercial center
included in this evaluation).
10.Project Entitlements:
•Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3115 to subdivide two existing parcels into five lots ranging in size from
0.69 acre to 4.79 acres, including a design exception for Tank Farm Road frontage improvements to
allow 11-foot vs. 12-foot-wide travel lanes.
•Development Plan approval of the Westmont Living Facility, including a creek setback exception to
encroach into approximately 4,963 square-feet of the setback area for road improvements. Separate
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 6
approval will be required in a future application for any development on the eastern portion of the site
(which may or may not include medical office and retail/restaurant development).
•Airport Area Specific Plan Amendments including associated development standards and amendment of
the Specific Plan zone designation from BP-SP to C-C-SF-SP to be consistent with the rezone of the
property which occurred when the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) was adopted
in 2014.
•General Plan Amendment and rezone for the 1.37-acre parcel at 660 Tank Farm Road modifying the land
use designation from Business Park to Community Commercial and the Zoning Designation from
Business Park (BP-SP) to Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay (C-C-SF-SP).
11.Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
The project site’s topography is relatively level and currently supports non-native annual grassland and ruderal
habitats and an ephemeral drainage with mostly herbaceous vegetation along with several willow trees, a patch of
bulrush, and a non-native blackberry thicket. There is an existing soil stockpile on the southern portion of the
project site, which would be used for the proposed grading activities. The project site’s northern and western
boundaries are defined by drainage swales that flow west to the confluence with Orcutt Creek.
The project site is located at the northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road within the Airport Area
Specific Plan (AASP). Surrounding uses include SESLOC Federal Credit Union to the north, a mobile home park
to the west, Marigold Shopping Center to the east, and Mindbody offices and the Edna Valley Market and Gas
Station to the south. Orcutt Creek is located along the western boundary of the project site. The majority of the
site (8.5 acres) is zoned Community-Commercial with Special Focus Area Overlay (C-C-SF-SP). The Business
Park (BP-SP) zoned portion of the site is approximately 1.5 acres.
Surrounding adjacent land uses and zoning are provided in the table below:
Table 2: Adjacent Land Uses
LAND USE EXISTING USES / TENANTS
NORTH Business Park (BP-SP) SESLOC Federal Credit Union
(SESLOC)*
SOUTH Business Park (BP-SP) Mindbody, Edna Valley Market
& Gas Station
EAST Community Commercial (C-C) Marigold Shopping Center /
Vons
WEST Service Commercial (C-S-SP) Hidden Hills Mobile Home
Park**
*A development application has been received by the City for this site and is currently under review. The application is seeking
entitlements for the construction of a new 12,000 square-foot three-story commercial structure to expand the existing SESLOC
Credit Union campus.
**A development application has been received by the City for this site and is currently under review. The application is seeking
entitlements to construct a mixed-use development including 249 apartment units and approximately 18,500 square-feet of
commercial space.
12.Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural
resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
A Cultural Resources Survey of the project site (Terry L. Joslin, Ph.D., RPA, Central Coast Archaeological
Research Consultants) has been prepared. Native American Tribes have been notified about the project consistent
with City and State regulations. No requests for consultation were received.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 7
13.Other public agencies whose approval is required:
•SLO County Airport Land Use Commission - Airport Land Use Plan Consistency Determination
•U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 39 Commercial and Institutional Developments
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
•Regional Water Quality Control Board CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification
•California Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Section 1600 Permit
•San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 8
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
“Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐Aesthetics ☒Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐Public Services
☐Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☐Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐Recreation
☒Air Quality ☐Hydrology and Water Quality ☒Transportation
☒Biological Resources ☐Land Use and Planning ☒Tribal Cultural Resources
☒Cultural Resources ☐Mineral Resources ☐Utilities and Service Systems
☐Energy ☒Noise ☐Wildfire
☐Geology and Soils ☐Population and Housing ☒Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND WILDLIFE FEES
☐
The Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect determination
request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or habitat (see
attached determination).
☒
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and
Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
☒
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State
agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community
Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)).
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 9
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ☒
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required. ☐
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
☐
Signature Date
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name
Tyler Corey, Principal Planner Community Development Director
August 6, 2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 10
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1.A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like
the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors
to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2.All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3.Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there
are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4.“Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross-
referenced).
5.Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a)Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b)Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c)Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe
the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which
they addressed site-specific conditions for the project.
6.Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts
(e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where
appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8.The explanation of each issue should identify:
a)the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b)the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 11
1.AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?1, 5 ☐☐☒☐
b)Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
1, 5, 9,
35 ☐☐☐☒
c)In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
1, 5, 35 ☐☐☒☐
d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
1, 5, 18,
35 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
The AASP area is characterized as semi-rural, with grazing land intermixed with occasional one- and two-story industrial and
business park development. Views in the planning area include the Santa Lucia Range and Islay Hill to the east. In addition, a
small range of low hills separates the planning area from the city core to the north. The project site is located in the southeastern
portion of the city and is generally surrounded by commercial service and retail uses; residential uses are located immediately
west of the site. The project site is primarily undeveloped and contains a vacant single-family residence and is characterized by
non-native annual grassland and several non-native trees, primarily eucalyptus.
The City’s Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) identifies specific goals and policies intended to protect and enhance
the city’s visual quality and character. Policies in the COSE include, but are not limited to, promoting the creation of
“streetscapes” and linear scenic parkways during construction or modification of major roadways, designing new development
to be consistent with the surrounding architectural context, and preservation of natural and agricultural landscapes. The COSE
and Circulation Element assign scenic value ratings of ‘moderate’ and ‘high’ to several roadways in the city, based on the
availability of views of scenic resources from these public viewpoints. According to the Circulation Element of the General Plan,
the segment of U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) through the city of San Luis Obispo is identified as having moderate and high
scenic value. The COSE identifies Tank Farm Road has having high scenic value west of the intersection with Santa Fe Road,
and moderate scenic value east of the intersection with Santa Fe Road. The portion of Broad Street along the project site is also
identified as having high scenic value. The COSE does not identify any “cones of view” or other important scenic vistas in the
project site vicinity.
The project site is located along a portion of Broad Street that is part of State Route 227 (S.R. 227), a state highway that begins
at U.S. Route 101 (U.S. 101) and continues through San Luis Obispo to Arroyo Grande. This portion of S.R. 227 is not a
designated or eligible state scenic highway. U.S.101 is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the project site. The section of
U.S. 101 that extends through the city of San Luis Obispo is classified as an eligible state scenic highway but is not officially
designated (Caltrans 2015).
In addition to regulation through local General Plan policies, the City’s Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviews for
conformance with Community Design Guidelines. Architectural review is a process whereby the City’s ARC examines a
proposed project’s layout, building design, its relationship to the neighborhood in which it would be located, landscaping,
parking, signage, lighting, and other features affecting the project’s appearance. The ARC is charged with administering
architectural review to help achieve attractive and environmentally sensitive development. The ARC’s by‐laws include design
review process goals of maintaining property values, preserving the city’s natural beauty and distinct visual character, attracting
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 12
growth in the local economy and maintaining the community’s quality of life for residents. The ARC uses the City’s Community
Design Guidelines as a basis for evaluating the suitability and appropriateness of individual project design.
a)A scenic vista is generally defined as a high-quality view displaying good aesthetic and compositional values that
can be seen from public viewpoints. Some scenic vistas are officially or informally designated by public agencies
or other organizations. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur if the proposed project would
significantly degrade the scenic landscape as viewed from public roads or other public areas. The proposed project
would be located on the north side of Tank Farm Road with frontage along the segment of the road designated as
having moderate scenic value, east of Santa Fe Road, and is briefly visible from the portion of Tank Farm Road that
is designated as having high scenic value, west of Santa Fe Road. The project would also front the west side of
Broad Street along the high scenic value segment of road. Existing views of the site consist of security fencing, non-
native grasses and trees. Views through the site facing north-northeast from Tank Farm Road consist of commercial
development on parcels to the north (SESLOC) and east (Marigold). Distant hillside views can be seen through the
site and to the east, as viewed from Tank Farm Road.
The project would modify foreground views to the north and northeast through the site by constructing new buildings
for the Westmont Living facility and for future commercial center development. The 2003 AASP EIR, which
established the current 45-foot height limit and buildout potential for the project site, determined that urbanization
of the AASP would irreversibly change the visual character of the south end of the city from that of a low density
semi-rural area to a more intensely developed, suburban area. This change was determined to be significant and
unavoidable and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted by the City Council. The Westmont Living
facility building would be predominantly 26 feet with its high point at the top of the parapet (32 feet). Development
plans has not been submitted for development on the eastern portion of the property. However, the proposed
Community Commercial designation would allow for a maximum building height of 35 feet from the average
existing grade elevation of the site. Architectural projections such as parapets, antennas, vents, etc. would be allowed
to encroach up to 10 feet beyond the 35-foot limit. The proposed Community Commercial designation would also
allow for up to 75% lot coverage and up to a 2.0 floor area ratio (FAR). In comparison, the existing Business Park
(BP) designation allows for heights up to 45 feet, lot coverage up to 75%, and a FAR of 0.6 - 1.0 depending on use.
Architectural projections in the Business Park (BP) designation are allowed to encroach up to 7 feet beyond the 45-
foot limit
The project would modify the foreground and middle ground views as experienced from Tank Farm Road by
constructing a new two-story structure and a new single-story structure with frontage on Tank Farm Road. New
development would be visible in the foreground and would block views of other structures looking to the north and
northeast but would not block views of hillsides or other natural resources experienced from the cone of vision while
driving east along Tank Farm Road. A conceptual site plan for the eastern portion identifies potential placement of
a single-story structure adjacent to the Tank Farm Road/Broad Street intersection, which would help ensure views
of the hills are not lost while approaching the intersection or turning north onto Broad Street. These hillsides are not
within designated scenic vistas and there are no identified scenic “cones of view” through the site.
Future development on the eastern portion of the project site has the potential to modify the foreground views from
Broad Street. A conceptual site plan shows that future development may include a new multi-story structure and
two single-story structures with frontage on Broad Street. Travelling north on Broad Street, public views consist of
street-frontage landscaping, commercial development, and shopping centers, with intermittent views of the South
Hills, which are predominately blocked by existing eucalyptus trees on the project site. Travelling south on Broad
Street, views of the site are generally blocked by the existing SESLOC building, ornamental landscaping, and street
trees. Public views consist of a commercial shopping center and transportation-related infrastructure. Initial views
of the site from Broad Street are predominately of the grove of eucalyptus trees clustered at the northern corner of
the project site. These trees would be removed as part of the project. If the conceptual future project is realized,
public views would consist of the multi-story medical office structure and intermittent views of the Mindbody
campus. Single-story retail structures would block views of the existing Mindbody campus and the gas station on
the southwest corner of the Tank Farm Road/Broad Street intersection. Future development on the eastern portion
of the project site would require future entitlements which would require review and consistency with the City’s
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 13
General Plan policies and implementing measures in the Zoning Code, Community Design Guidelines, and ARC
policies and guidelines.
The visual character of the site would be modified, as the existing vacant residence and non-native grasses and trees
would be replaced with the proposed new development. Removal of existing trees would not degrade or block any
designated high scenic views or otherwise degrade the existing quality of the site or surroundings, and the project
would incorporate on-site landscaping and new plantings as part of the riparian enhancement of Orcutt Creek.
Additionally, the Westmont Living facility has been reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC),
which recommended that the Planning Commission find the project consistent with the Community Design
Guidelines and design guidance in the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). The Planning Commission reviewed the
project and found the project consistent with the Community Design Guidelines and design guidance in the AASP
and recommended approval the City Council. Impacts would be less than significant.
b)The project site is located along Tank Farm Road and Broad Street. This portion of Broad Street is part of S.R. 227,
a state highway that begins at U.S. 101 and continues through San Luis Obispo to Arroyo Grande. This portion of
S.R. 227 is not a designated or eligible state scenic highway. U.S.101 is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the
project site. The section of U.S. 101 that extends through the city of San Luis Obispo is classified as an eligible state
scenic highway but is not officially designated (Caltrans 2015). The City has identified U.S. 101 from the southern
city limit to Marsh Street as a highway with high scenic value, and between Marsh Street and Broad Street, and
north of California Street, as a highway with moderate scenic value. Due to the distance between U.S. 101 and the
project site, intervening topography, and the existing urban development, there are no available views of the project
site from U.S. 101. Therefore, there would be no impact.
c)See impact discussion a). Impacts would be less than significant.
d)Existing sources of nighttime lighting in the vicinity of the project site include streetlights along Tank Farm Road
and Broad Street, spillover lighting from surrounding development to the south and east, light from the headlights
of vehicles traveling along Tank Farm Road and Broad Street, and from the single-family residential development
to the southeast. Development of the project site would result in an increase in ambient nighttime lighting through
the addition of parking lot and security/safety lighting and exterior fixtures associated with the Westmont Living
facility use and future development on the eastern portion of the project site. The project would also result in an
increase of headlights and vehicle glare from vehicles accessing the site. In addition, exterior building materials,
windows, and surface paving materials may cause glare that could affect the nearby residence to the southwest. The
project would be required to conform to the City’s Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Zoning Regulations Chapter
17.23), which sets operation standards and requirements for lighting installations. These include limits on outdoor
lighting that is misdirected, excessive, or unnecessary, and requires lighting to meet the minimum requirements of
the California Code of Regulations for Outdoor Lighting and Signs (CCR Title 24, Chapter 6). The project would
also be required to comply with the City’s General Plan policies pertaining to lighting and glare (Policy 9.2.3
Outdoor Lighting), as well as the City’s Community Design Guidelines. Prior to development of the proposed
project, the applicant would also be required to provide an overall lighting plan that demonstrates that the project
complies with the requirements of City Ordinance No. 17.18.030, which prohibits lighting or illuminated devices
that would create glare which results in a hazard or nuisance on other properties. Compliance with applicable City
policies and regulations would ensure that impacts associated with the creation of new sources of exterior lighting
and glare would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 14
2.AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range
Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest
Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a)Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
1, 9, 19 ☐☐☐☒
b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?12 ☐☐☐☒
c)Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
19 ☐☐☐☒
d)Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?19 ☐☐☐☒
e)Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
19 ☐☐☐☒
Evaluation
The California Department of Conservation (DOC) classifies and maps agricultural lands in the state in the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP identifies five farmland categories: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Local Potential. The project site is designated
as Urban and Built-Up Land by the DOC FMMP.
The project site is an urban in-fill site surrounded by existing development. There are no agricultural resources on the site; the
nearest active agricultural operations are located in the unincorporated county, both to the south along S.R. 227 in Edna Valley
and to the west along Buckley Road. Based on Figure 6 in the City’s COSE, the project site is not located within or immediately
adjacent to land under an active Williamson Act contract. The project site currently supports non-native annual grassland and
ruderal habitats as well as an ephemeral drainage with mostly herbaceous vegetation along with several willow trees, a patch of
bulrush, and a non-native blackberry thicket. Soils on the site include Cropley clay (0 to 2 percent slopes) and Concepcion loam
(2 to 5 percent slopes).
According to Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10percent native tree cover
of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources,
including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. Timberland is
defined as land, other than land owned by the federal government and land designated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire
Protection as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a commercial species
used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. The project site does not support any forest land or
timberland.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 15
a)According to the FMMP, the project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Important Farmland).The project site is not in active agricultural use, is not located on land
considered Important Farmland, and is in an area long designated for urban infill development in the AASP.
Therefore, there would be no impact.
b)There is no agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site or surrounding vicinity.
Therefore, there would be no impact.
c)The project site is not zoned for forest land or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, there would be
no impact.
d)The project site does not support any forest land or timberland. Therefore, there would be no impact.
e)The project site has not been used for grazing or active agriculture in the recent past. Therefore, this project will not
result in any direct loss of productive farmland. Other lands in the vicinity of the project site are either already
developed or are slated by the AASP for eventual non-agricultural use whether this project proceeds or not.
Therefore, this project has no direct correlation to any planned conversions of farmland to non-agricultural uses.
The impacts of conversion of these lands to non-agricultural uses were evaluated both in the environmental
documents for the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element and the AASP and found to be insignificant. This
project complies with said policies through consistency with approved land use designations. Therefore, there would
be no impact.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
No impact.
3.AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
20, 21,
35 ☐☐☒☐
b)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
20, 21,
33, 35,
45 ☐☒☐☐
c)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
20, 21,
32, 33,
45 ☐☒☐☐
d)Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?4, 32, 46 ☐☒☐☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is in the San Luis Obispo County portion of the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which is
under the jurisdiction of the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). SLOAPCD monitors air pollutant
levels to assure that air quality standards are met, and if they are not met, develops strategies to meet the standards. Depending
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 16
on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the air basin is classified as being in “attainment” or as “non-attainment.” San
Luis Obispo County is in non-attainment for the state 24-hour standard for particulate matter (PM10), partial non-attainment for
federal ambient standards for ground-level ozone (O3), and the state eight-hour standard for ozone ). The COSE identifies goals
and policies to achieve and maintain air quality that support health and enjoyment for those who live, work, and visit the city.
These goals and policies include meeting state and federal air quality standards, reducing dependency on gasoline- or diesel-
powered motor vehicles and to encourage walking, biking, and public transit use.
The major sources of PM10 in the SCCAB are agricultural operations, vehicle dust, grading, and dust produced by high winds.
Additional sources of particulate pollution include diesel exhaust; mineral extraction and production; combustion products from
industry and motor vehicles; smoke from open burning; paved and unpaved roads; condensation of gaseous pollutants into liquid
or solid particles; and wind-blown dust from soils disturbed by demolition and construction, agricultural operations, off-road
vehicle recreation, and other activities. Ozone is a secondary pollutant that is formed by a reaction between nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and reactive organic gases (ROGs) in the presence of sunlight. Therefore, ozone levels are dependent on the amount of
these precursors. In the SCCAB, the major sources of ROGs are motor vehicles, organic solvents, petroleum production, and
pesticides. The major sources of NOX are motor vehicles, public utility power generation, and fuel combustion by various
industrial sources.
The SLOAPCD has developed a CEQA Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated with a November 2017 Clarification
Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts and determine if potentially significant impacts could result from a project.
To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels,
a Clean Air Plan (2001) has been adopted by the SLOAPCD.
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the
activities involved. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has identified the following groups as most likely to be affected
by air pollution (i.e., sensitive receptors): children under 14, the elderly over 65 years of age, athletes, and people with
cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. The project site is located within 1,000 feet of multiple sensitive receptors,
including residential dwelling units to the west (mobile home park/planned residential development) and east and the Damon-
Garcia Sports Complex to the north.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Any ground disturbance
proposed in an area identified as having the potential to contain NOA must comply with the CARB’s Airborne Toxics Control
Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations. The SLOAPCD’s Naturally Occurring
Asbestos Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for NOA to occur.
To facilitate potential future CEQA streamlining when a development project application is submitted for the eastern portion of
the project site, this section analyzes the potential environmental effects of the conceptual plan for the commercial center, as
discussed in the project description.
a)The SLOAPCD adopted the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) in 2002. The 2001 CAP is a comprehensive planning
document intended to provide guidance to the SLOAPCD and other local agencies, including the City, on how to
attain and maintain the state standards for ozone and PM10. The CAP presents a detailed description of the sources
and pollutants which impact the jurisdiction, future air quality impacts to be expected under current growth trends,
and an appropriate control strategy for reducing ozone precursor emissions, thereby improving air quality. In order
to be considered consistent with the 2001 CAP, a project must be consistent with the land use planning and
transportation control measures and strategies outlined in the CAP. The proposed project is consistent with the
general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP. The proposed development’s location, uses, and
intensity is generally consistent with planning envisioned in the City’s 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element
update and with the CAP’s land use planning strategies, including locating the proposed development within an
urban area proximate to an existing roadway, near transit services, and near existing shopping areas.
Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are controls implemented at the local or regional level to reduce emissions
resulting from the use of motor vehicles. TCMs are primarily intended to reduce vehicle use by promoting and
facilitating the use of alternative transportation options. Many of the TCMs identified within the CAP are not
applicable to the project, such as campus trip reduction programs, local and regional public transportation
improvements, motor vehicle inspection programs, and maintenance and development of park-and-ride lots
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 17
throughout the county. The project would be generally consistent with the CAP TCM to promote bicycle use through
provision of secure bicycle storage to encourage project employees to bike to and from work. The project site is not
located in or adjacent to an area with proposed/needed bicycle infrastructure or improvements as identified in the
CAP or City of San Luis Obispo Bicycle Transportation Plan. As described above, the project location would
contribute to the Westmont Living facility occupants’ overall reduction of dependence on automobiles and daily
vehicle miles travelled. The project would be consistent with all applicable land use and TCMs identified in the
CAP. Therefore, impacts related to a conflict with an air quality plan would be less than significant.
b)Construction Emissions
Temporary construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate criteria pollutant emissions
(i.e., fugitive dust and ozone precursor emissions) as well as toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions (i.e. diesel
particulate matter (DPM) emissions), which would contribute to the existing San Luis Obispo County non-
attainment status for ozone and PM10. Table 3 summarizes the estimated short-term emissions from construction
and shows maximum daily and quarterly emissions during construction compared to the applicable SLOAPCD
construction emissions thresholds. Based on the project construction schedule and proposed structures, it is
anticipated that a maximum of four large pieces of construction equipment would be active at the same time under
maximum load. For modeling purposes, two bulldozers, a front-end loader, and a scraper were used to represent the
equipment that would be active simultaneously.
Table 3. Maximum Construction Emissions
Daily (lbs/day) Quarterly (tons/quarter)
ROG +NOx
(combined)
ROG +NOx
(combined)1
Fugitive PM10
(dust)2 DPM2,3
Maximum Construction
Emissions 50.63 1.62 0.11 0.07
SLOAPCD
Significance Threshold 137 2.5 (Tier 1) 2.5 (Tier 1) 0.13 (Tier 1)
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
See Appendix A for CalEEMod results.
1 The combined ROG and NOx emissions were derived from the rolling maximum quarterly emissions for “ROG + NOx” from
CalEEMod.
2 Quarterly emissions for Fugitive PM10 and DPM were calculated by dividing maximum annual construction emissions from
CalEEMod by 4, since construction activities would extend for a duration exceeding 90 days, as recommended by SLOAPCD.
3 The DPM estimations were derived from the “PM10 Exhaust” and “PM2.5 Exhaust” output from CalEEMod as recommended
by SLOAPCD. This estimation represents a worst-case scenario because it includes other PM10 exhaust other than DPM.
As shown in Table 2, maximum construction emissions would not exceed the quarterly SLOAPCD thresholds for
PM10, DPM, the daily SLOAPCD threshold for ROG and NOX, or the quarterly SLOAPCD threshold for ROG and
NOX. Even though temporary construction impacts related to emissions of ROG and NOX would be less than
significant, Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 are recommended to further reduce impacts. Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2
incorporate the standard construction equipment mitigation measures and BACT measures required by SLOAPCD
for construction projects that exceed the 2.5-tons-per-quarter threshold for ROG and NOX emissions (Attachment
4a, Rincon Consultants Air Quality Technical Memorandum and 4b, SWCA Updated CalEEMod Emissions
Modeling). Impacts would be less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 18
Operational Emissions
Operation of the proposed project would result in an increase in vehicle trips that would generate new criteria
pollutant emissions in the SCCAB. In addition, operation of new land uses on the project site would result in long-
term emissions associated with natural gas use and area sources, such as landscaping, consumption of consumer
products, and off-gassing from architectural coatings. Table 4 shows the daily and annual operational emissions
associated with the proposed project compared to the applicable SLOAPCD operational emissions thresholds.
Table 4. Maximum Operational Emissions
ROG +NOx
(combined)
Fugitive PM10
(dust) DPM1 CO
Proposed Project Daily Emissions 34.1lbs/day2 13.0 0lbs/day 0.70 lb/day2 64.06lbs/day
SLOAPCD Daily Threshold 25 lbs/day 25 lbs/day 1.25 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
Threshold Exceeded? Yes No No No
Proposed Project Annual Emissions 4.36
tons/year 1.66 tons/year 0.0902
ton/year 8.20tons/year
SLOAPCD Annual Threshold 25 tons/year 25 tons/year n/a n/a
Threshold Exceeded? No No n/a n/a
See Attachment 4b for CalEEMod results.
1 DPM estimates were derived from the “PM10 Exhaust” and “PM2.5 Exhaust” output from CalEEMod as recommended by
SLOAPCD. Based on CARB statewide inventories, DPM is roughly 8 percent of statewide PM2.5. This estimate represents a
worst-case scenario because it includes all PM10 exhaust.
2 SLOAPCD specifies that CalEEMod winter emission outputs be compared to operational thresholds for these pollutants.
Note: All numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding.
The analysis of operational emissions does not consider TACs because the project does not propose a stationary
source of toxic air emissions that would impact adjacent sensitive receptors. Additionally, the project site is not
located close to a freeway or urban road with daily traffic volumes greater than 100,000 vehicles, which is the
screening criteria identified by CARB to determine if TAC emissions would exposure the public to excessive cancer
risk. Based on guidance from CARB and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), the
project would not expose people to undue excess cancer risk from exposure to TACs, which is defined as a risk of
greater than 10 in a million.
The proposed Westmont Living facility and conceptual commercial center would not generate a substantial number
of diesel truck trips and would not substantially increase the number of trucks on local or regional roadways.
Therefore, long-term operational emissions would be less than significant.
As shown in Table 3, daily operational emissions associated with development under the proposed project would
not exceed SLOAPCD operational daily and annual thresholds for PM10, DPM, or CO, or annual threshold for ROG
and NOX. The project would exceed the SLOAPCD operational daily threshold for ROG and NOX. According to
the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, projects that generate between 30 and 35 lbs/day of combined ROG
and NOX shall select and implement at least 8 mitigation measures from Table 3-5 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Air
Quality Handbook. This requirement has been included as Mitigation Measure AQ-3, and upon implementation
would reduce ROG and NOX daily emissions to less than significant with mitigation.
c)The project does not include stationary sources of toxic air emissions that would impact adjacent sensitive receptors
and the project site is not located close to a freeway urban road with daily traffic volumes of greater than 100,000
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 19
vehicles. The nearest potential sensitive receptors would be the existing mobile home park/planned residential units
located on the parcel immediately adjacent to the project site’s western boundary (650 Tank Farm Road). Because
the project would be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, additional fugitive dust mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2and AQ-4 would reduce construction related air quality impacts to sensitive receptors to
less than significant. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d)The project would amend the AASP land use designation consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning
designations to allow the proposed uses that are consistent with the Community Commercial Zone with Special
Focus Overlay (C-C-SF-SP). None of the uses are identified by SLOAPCD as uses that typically create objectionable
odors. In addition, the project site is surrounded by service commercial/business park land uses, an existing residence
to the southeast, and open space and agricultural operations further to the southwest. None of these land uses include
operations listed in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook as potential odor-contributing sources. Therefore, development
under the proposed General Plan Amendment and rezone would not result in objectionable odors that would affect
a substantial number of people.
The project site is located in an area identified by the SLOAPCD as having a potential for NOA to occur. Pursuant
to SLOAPCD requirements and ARB Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying,
and Surface Mining Operations (93105), the applicant is required to provide geologic evaluation prior to any
construction activities and comply with existing regulations regarding NOA, if present. Mitigation Measures AQ-4
and AQ-5 have been identified to require the applicant to complete a geologic evaluation and follow all applicable
protocols and procedures if NOA is determined to be present onsite.
The existing structure located onsite was constructed in 1940 and may have the potential to include asbestos
containing materials (ACM) and/or lead-based paint. Demolition of this structure may have the potential to result in
harmful asbestos or lead emissions. The project is proposing to demolish an existing single-family residence and
would be subject to the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(40CFR61, Subpart M - asbestos NESHAP). Mitigation Measure AQ-6 has been identified to require full
compliance with applicable regulatory requirements for removal and disposal of these toxic contaminants if present
on-site, including notification of the SLOAPCD prior to demolition of the existing structure. Therefore, this impact
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. These measures are required
in addition to compliance with all required state and local laws that relate to air quality, as enforced by the San Luis Obispo Air
Pollution Control District (APCD).
AQ-1 Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment
The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented during the site preparation and grading phases of
construction 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 CARB-certified motor vehicle diesel fuel nontaxed
version suitable for use off-road);
•Comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;
•Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’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;
•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;
•Diesel idling within 500 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be not permitted;7
•Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 500 feet of sensitive receptors;6
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 20
•Equipment shall be electrified when feasible;
•Gasoline-powered equipment shall be substituted in place of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible; and
•Alternatively-fueled construction equipment shall be used on-site where feasible, such as compressed natural gas,
liquefied natural gas, propane or biodiesel.
AQ-2 Best Available Control Technology. Diesel construction equipment used during the site preparation and grading
phases shall be equipped with CARB Tier 3 or Tier 4 certified off-road engines and 2010 on-road compliant engines.
AQ-3 The project would result in ROG and NOx operational emissions that exceed the SLOAPCD threshold of 25 lbs/day.
Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall identify at least 8 mitigation measures from Table 3-5 of
the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to incorporate into the project. Prior to occupancy, final inspection, or
establishment of the use, whichever occurs first, the project shall demonstrate that it has implements such measures. If
the project obtains a GreenPoint rating or is LEED certified, the applicant shall only need to implement 6 mitigation
measures from Table 3-5 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
AQ-4 This project is greater than 4 acres and within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors (residential units). Construction activities
can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed
construction site. Projects with grading areas that are greater than 4-acres or are within 1,000 feet of any sensitive
receptor shall implement the following measures to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the
APCD’s 20% opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402):
a.Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b.Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site
and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period.
Increased watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 mph. Reclaimed (non-
potable) water should be used whenever possible. When drought conditions exist and water use is a concern,
the contractor or builder should consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where feasible to
reduce the amount of water used for dust control. Please refer to the following link from the San Joaquin
Valley Air District for a list of potential dust suppressants: Products Available for Controlling Dust;
c.All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed;
d.Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans should
be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;
e.Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading
should be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is established;
f.All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,
jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD;
g.All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
h.Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site;
i.All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two
feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114;
j.“Track-Out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor
vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in CVC
Section 23113 and California Water Code 13304. To prevent ‘track out’, designate access points and require
all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install and operate a ‘track-out prevention device’
where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The ‘trackout prevention device’ can be any
device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track out, located at the point of intersection
of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need periodic cleaning to be
effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked out soils, the trackout prevention device may need to be
modified;
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 21
k.Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible;
l.All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans; and
m.The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any fugitive
dust emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures as
necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity
for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods
when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be generated on an open dirt lot).
The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior
to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at 805- 781-5912).
AQ-5 The applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property including sampling and
testing for naturally occurring asbestos in full compliance with California Air Resources Board Air Toxics Control
Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (93105) and SLOAPCD
requirements. This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department upon
completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have the potential to disturb asbestos
containing materials (ACM), the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-6 If asbestos containing materials (ACM) are determined to be present onsite, proposed earthwork, demolition, and
construction activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding ACM,
including the ARB Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations (93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(40 CFR 61, Subpart M – Asbestos; NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1.Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2.Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and,
3.Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified ACM.
AQ-7 The applicant shall implement the following measures to reduce the risk associated with disturbance of ACM and lead-
coated materials that may be present within the existing structure onsite:
a.Demolition of the on-site structure shall comply with the procedures required by the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart M – Asbestos) for the control of asbestos
emissions during demolition activities. SLOAPCD is the delegated authority by the U.S. EPA to implement
the Federal Asbestos NESHAP. Prior to demolition of on-site structures, SLOAPCD shall be notified, per
NESHAP requirements. The project applicant shall submit proof that SLOAPCD has been notified prior to
demolition activities to the City Community Development Department.
b.If during the demolition of the existing structure, paint is separated from the construction materials (e.g.,
chemically or physically), the paint waste shall be evaluated independently from the building material by a
qualified hazardous materials inspector to determine its proper management. All hazardous materials shall be
handled and disposed of in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. According to the Department
of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), if the paint is not removed from the building material during demolition
(and is not chipping or peeling), the material can be disposed of as non-hazardous construction debris. The
landfill operator shall be contacted prior to disposal of lead-based paint materials. If required, all lead work
plans shall be submitted to SLOAPCD at least 10 days prior to the start of demolition. The applicant shall
submit proof that paint waste has been evaluated by a qualified hazardous waste materials inspector and handled
according to their recommendation to the City Community Development Department.
Conclusion
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 22
4.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
5, 15, 28,
29, 35,
38, 39 ☐☒☐☐
b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
5, 15, 28,
29, 35,
38, 39 ☐☒☐☐
c)Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
5, 15, 28,
29, 35,
38, 39 ☐☒☐☐
d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
5, 15, 28,
29, 35,
38, 39 ☐☐☒☐
e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
5, 10, 29 ☐☐☒☐
f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
5, 10, 29 ☐☐☐☒
Evaluation
The urbanized area of the city of San Luis Obispo lies at the convergence of two main geologic features: Los Osos Valley, which
drains westerly into Morro Bay via Los Osos Creek, and San Luis Valley, which drains to the south- southwest into the Pacific
Ocean at Avila Beach via San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo, Stenner, Prefumo, and Brizzolara creeks, and numerous
tributary channels pass through the city, providing important riparian habitat and migration corridors connecting urbanized areas
to less-developed habitats in the larger area surrounding the city.
Much of the area outside the city limits consists of open rangeland grazed year-round, along with agricultural lands dominated
by annual crop rotations and vineyards. A variety of natural habitats and associated plant communities are present within the city
and support a diverse array of native plants and resident, migratory, and locally nomadic wildlife species, some of which, are
considered rare, threatened, or endangered species. However, the largest concentrations of natural and native habitats are located
in the larger and less developed areas outside the city limits.
The project site currently supports disturbed non-native annual grassland and ruderal habitats (i.e., previously disturbed) as well
as an ephemeral drainage with mostly herbaceous vegetation along with several willow trees, a patch of bulrush, and a non-
native blackberry thicket. The majority of the project site has been developed with site improvements and buildings, etc., as
recent as 2003, and dating back to approximately 1937 with buildings and active equipment/materials storage. The site has been
vacant since 2004 when buildings were removed and the surface was cleared leaving only the non-native trees, the remaining
vacant residence, and a temporary soil stockpile.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 23
An approved soil stockpile is present on the southwest corner of the property. An ephemeral drainage with a low-flow channel
and a small adjacent wetland floodplain at the eastern reach enters the site through a 24-inch culvert in the northeast corner of
the property (across from the Marigold Center entry on Broad Street) and flows west to the confluence with Orcutt Creek, located
in the northwest corner of the project site. Orcutt Creek flows southwesterly along the west edge of the property to a culvert
under Tank Farm Road. The property is bordered by urban development on the north, east, and south sides, with residential
development to the west.
The City COSE identifies various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect natural communities within the City
planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protection of listed species and species of special concern,
preservation of existing wildlife corridors, protection of significant trees, and maintaining development setbacks from creeks.
The City’s Tree Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 12.24) was adopted in 2010 and recently updated in 2019 with the purpose
of establishing a comprehensive program for installing, maintaining, and preserving trees within the city. This ordinance includes
policies that encourage preservation of trees whenever possible and feasible, detail the procedure and requirements for acquisition
of a permit for tree removal within the city, and identify application requirements for tree removals associated with development
permits. The City has also established a Heritage Tree Program which protects Heritage trees throughout the city designated by
the Tree Committee and City Council. Based on the City’s GIS Division Heritage Trees map, no heritage trees are located within
the project site.
Methods of Survey and Assessment
Sage Institute biologists conducted a review of available background information including the project information, aerial
photographs dating back to 1937, NRCS Soils Survey information, and a search and review of the current California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) within an approximate 5-mile search radius of the project site. The 5-mile radius was used as the
typical 10-mile search radius would have included rural areas well outside of the city limits that would not be relevant to this
study in the urbanized city of San Luis Obispo. The CNDDB provided a list with mapped locations of special-status plant and
wildlife species, as well as natural communities of special concern, that have been recorded within the region of the project site.
Sage Institute conducted field reconnaissance surveys of the project site on May 20, July 10, and July 31, 2014; July 3, 2017;
and February 22, 2018. The purpose of the field surveys was to document existing conditions within the project site in terms of
habitat for plants and wildlife species, and the potential to support jurisdictional wetlands, riparian habitats, and/or waters of the
U.S./State. Plant and wildlife species observed in the field were recorded. The field surveys included a thorough and complete
springtime floristic inventory and rare plant survey in 2014 of observable and identifiable plants. The 2017 and 2018 field surveys
affirmed conditions were unchanged from the initial field surveys conducted in 2014. A wetland delineation and preliminary
jurisdictional determination was completed, identifying U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction authority under the
Nationwide Permitting Program.
The study area habitat types were described by the aggregation of plants and wildlife based on the composition and structure of
the dominant vegetation observed at the time the field reconnaissance was conducted. The determination of jurisdictional
wetlands and/or waters of the U.S./State was made using the currently accepted Corps wetland delineation methodology and
Clean Water Act Section 404 implementing regulations and guidance.
PLANT COMMUNITIES - The project site supports the following distinct plant communities: 1) disturbed non-native annual
grassland with non-native trees; and 2) an ephemeral drainage with mostly herbaceous vegetation along with several willow
trees, a patch of bulrush, and a non-native blackberry thicket. Orcutt Creek, located along the western edge of the project site, is
choked with non-native forbs and shrubs. Figure 4 of the Sage report provides a habitat map. Figure 6 provides a set of
representative photographs of the existing conditions of the project site. All plant species observed during the field surveys,
including rare plant surveys, are included in the Sage Report (Attachment 3) The botanical surveys resulted in no observations
of any rare, threatened, endangered, or special status plant species within the project site. Further, the observable and identifiable
plants and disturbed soil surface from over 70 years of human use on the site is further evidence the site does not support any
special-status plants. A field survey by Sage Institute in 2018 confirmed that site conditions are unchanged since the 2014 floristic
inventory and rare plant survey.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 24
DISTURBED NON-NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSLAND – The disturbed annual grassland habitat, is dominated by nonnative
annual grasses and herbaceous broadleaf plant species, along with very few native species. Disturbed non-native annual grassland
habitat occurs as the dominant habitat type over the entire project site, with the exception of the ephemeral drainage that runs
along the northern property border. The approximately 9.3 acres of non-native annual grassland within the project site was
observed to be very low in species diversity and dominated by a near pure stand of wild oats (Avena barbata). Other plant species
observed in the non-native grassland habitat include, ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), filaree (Erodium cicutarium), cheeseweed
(Sidalcea sp.), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), harding
grass (Phalaris aquatica), teasel (Dipsacus sativus), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), bur-clover (Medicago
polymorpha), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), narrow-leaf milkweed (Asclepias fascicularis), and bristly ox-tongue
(Helminthotheca echioides). A few coyote brush shrubs (Baccharis pilularis) are scattered on the site, along with non-native
pine, cypress, acacia, and eucalyptus trees.
WILDLIFE - The mosaic of remnant patches of ruderal and vacant lands within the urbanized landscape on and around the
project site can provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species that have become adapted to the urban environment, such as
raccoons, opossums, ground squirrels and other rodents and reptiles. Even in urbanized areas, drainage corridors and trees can
provide high quality habitat for a variety of wildlife species that have become adapted to the urban environment, but in particular,
to resident and migratory birds. Common birds observed during field surveys include the northern mockingbird, house finch,
American goldfinch, and red-tailed hawk. Given that the site is surrounded by urban development, other wildlife use is likely
limited with generally low habitat value for wildlife attributed to the disturbed site. Given the urban setting with a limited
diversity of non-native grassland species, and the ephemeral nature of drainage along the north property line, the project site
does not support suitable habitat for any special status wildlife species.
EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE & SEASONAL WETLAND – An unnamed ephemeral drainage swale and low-flow channel run
just offsite along the northern property boundary from a 24-inch culvert under Broad Street at the northeast property corner to
the confluence with Orcutt Creek, which then cuts across the northwest corner of the project site. For the most part, the drainage
channel runs outside the property adjacent to the northern border. It appears to sheet flow over some of the property along an
upper terrace above the drainage but below the general elevation of the rest of the property. A small stand of arroyo willow (Salix
lasiolepis) occurs at the northwest corner with one small isolated tree in the center of the drainage. A patch of bulrush
(Schoenoplectus sp.), a Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) thicket, and one Canary Island date palm (Phoenix
canariensis) occur along the drainage. The upper terrace was dominated by Harding grass, teasel, soft chess, rabbitsfoot grass
(Polypogon sp.), and bristly ox-tongue. A patch of yerba mansa (Anemopsis californica) is mostly offsite in the swale with a
small amount encroaching onto the site along the property line. Orcutt Creek, with an established bed, bank, and channel, runs
along the western property line and is choked with non-native Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), harding grass, bristly oxtongue,
and castor bean (Ricinus communis) for most of its length.
WATERS OF THE U.S., WATERS OF THE STATE, & WETLANDS - The ephemeral drainage swale with low-flow channel
is located just offsite adjacent to the northern property line. The limits were shown on the SESLOC grading plans as jurisdictional
waters of the U.S., subject to Corps and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction. Currently, it appears
that the source of hydrology for the ephemeral drainage is from a culvert outfall just offsite at the northeast corner of the property
from runoff from surrounding commercial and residential development. The drainage appears to have become a prominent
drainage feature between 1994 and 2002 with the development of the Marigold Shopping Center.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 25
Figure 3: Jurisdictional Delineation – Northeast Corner
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 26
Figure 4: Jurisdictional Delineation – Northwest Corner
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 27
There is evidence of overflow flooding wetland hydrology (drift lines of debris and sediment deposits) from the ephemeral
drainage onto the property on a terrace that runs along the drainage on the property. The evaluation of soils identified field
indicators of hydric soils, suggesting a regular flooding regime over time during the wet season. The upper reach of the terrace
was dominated by Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), teasel (Dipsacus sativus), soft chess (Bromus hordaceous), rabbitsfoot
grass (Polypogon sp.), and bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), which that does not represent a wetland vegetation
community. Appendix B of the Sage Institute report provides the details of a wetland delineation and preliminary jurisdictional
determination evaluation performed on the terrace adjacent to the ephemeral drainage that runs just offsite along the northern
property boundary.
While some level of overland flow appears to occur, with the exception of the bulrush patch, the ephemeral nature of the drainage
overflow does not manifest a definitive wetland plant community. However, given several years of below normal rainfall at the
time of the delineation in 2014, this area was treated as a problem area wetland. As such, based on the presence of hydric soils
and wetland hydrology, approximately 0.19 acre (8,166 square feet) of jurisdictional seasonal wetland occurs on the bench above
the ephemeral drainage along the northern property boundary. Figures 3 and 4 above, (Figures JD-1 and JD-2 in Appendix A of
the Sage Institute report) show the location and extent of wetlands delineated adjacent to the ephemeral drainage, as described
above.
The ephemeral drainage meets Orcutt Creek at the northwest corner of the property, becoming Orcutt Creek that exhibits a
distinct bed, bank and channel. As described above, this reach of Orcutt Creek is choked with non-native grasses, forbs, and
shrubs. Orcutt Creek has been in its current alignment as a tributary drainage since as far back as 1937. Given it flows through a
sequence of creeks to San Luis Obispo Creek and the Pacific Ocean, Orcutt Creek is considered a tributary jurisdictional water
of the U.S./State. The Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) and top of bank are essentially the same along this reach,
representing the federal and state jurisdictional limits, respectively. Approximately 0.23 acre of jurisdictional waters of the
U.S./State are associated with Orcutt Creek within the project area.
a)Implementation of the proposed project would result in impacts to vegetation and wildlife utilizing disturbed non-
native annual grassland habitat from the development of the site. Due to the level of surrounding development,
frequent human activity, regular vehicle noise, lighting, and developed nature of the area, the project site does not
contain suitable habitat for special status plant or wildlife species. The project is not located within an area
designated as a wildlife corridor within the COSE. Tree removal and ground disturbance, even to the ruderal annual
grassland habitat, could impact nesting birds if conducted during the nesting season. This would be considered a
potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 is required to reduce potential impacts to a less-than-
significant level. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
b)Orcutt Creek runs parallel to the western property boundary. The existing riparian habitat associated with Orcutt
Creek is of low quality and is choked with non-native Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), harding grass, bristly
oxtongue, and castor bean (Ricinus communis) for most of its length. The project would generally be setback 35 feet
from the creek, as required by City regulation. The applicant is seeking an exception to the setback requirement to
allow grading and development activities that would encroach into approximately 4,963 square feet of the setback
area. The project would be required to comply with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) requirements set forth in their Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for
Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. Physical improvement of the project site will be required to
comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the
purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. Completion of this project would
ensure that construction-related discharges would be limited or adequately accommodated by properly engineered
infrastructure design. The project proposes an enhancement plan that would remove invasive non-native species and
would plant native plants in the northwest corner of the site and the creek setback area along Orcutt Creek. To affirm
acceptable regulatory compliance to reduce potential impacts to waters of the U.S./State to a less-than-significant
level, and to ensure successful implementation of replacement wetland area and riparian enhancement plantings,
Mitigation Measures BIO-2 through BIO-5 are required. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 28
c)Part of the project is to enhance the riparian corridor of Orcutt Creek and replace a small wetland at the northeast
corner of the property, which would be removed to enable the entry off Broad Street. Based upon circulation between
the proposed project and the existing SESLOC facility, located north of the subject properties, the Broad Street
access will impact 0.19 acres of seasonal wetland. Included in the impact area is a new crossing of the ephemeral
drainage required to provide access from the subject properties to the existing SESLOC facility.
The enhancement plan would also include removal of noxious, invasive, and non-native herbaceous and woody
species, while a new native plant planting program is proposed in the northwest corner and creek setback areas along
Orcutt Creek. Table CMMP-1 from the Sage Biological Assessment (Attachment 3) is a list of creek enhancement
plantings proposed as part of the project.
Development of an access driveway from Broad Street along the northern project boundary would impact
approximately 0.19 acre of herbaceous seasonal wetland habitat associated with the ephemeral drainage that would
require regulatory compliance from the federal and state agencies. This would be considered a potentially significant
impact without mitigation. Mitigation of impacts to 0.19 acre of seasonal wetland and ephemeral drainage area is
incorporated into the project design and would offset potential impacts to wetland areas at a 3:1 replacement ratio
with the enhancement of approximately 0.60 acre within the Orcutt Creek riparian corridor. However, to affirm
acceptable regulatory compliance to reduce potential impacts to waters of the U.S./State to a less-than-significant
level, and to ensure successful implementation of replacement wetland area and riparian enhancement plantings,
Mitigation Measures BIO-2 through BIO-5 are required. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
d)The project is not located within an area designated as a wildlife corridor within the COSE. According to the
Biological and Wetland Resources Assessment (Sage Institute 2018), neither the wetland area or Orcutt Creek serve
as a location habitat or migration corridor. Suitable habitat is not present in the small remaining reach of the
ephemeral drainage or Orcutt Creek for aquatic species with nearby recorded occurrences (Sage Institute 2018).
The proposed project includes creek restoration consistent with policies in the AASP for creeks which are in
degraded condition. The project also would not remove protected trees and includes substantial riparian
enhancement plantings within the development plan and as a part of the restoration component of the project. The
project does not conflict with local policies or ordinances regarding tree preservation or protection of biological
resources. This would be a less-than-significant impact.
e)The project application was submitted and initially reviewed prior to adoption of the current Tree Removal ordinance
requirements and therefore is not subject to the requirement for review by the City’s Tree Committee. The City
Arborist has reviewed the proposed tree removals and riparian enhancement plan and made a recommendation of
support to the ARC and PC. The project site does not contain any heritage trees or significant native vegetation. The
project includes the removal of multiple non-native trees, primary eucalyptus species. The project would not
adversely affect sensitive habitats or resources identified in the COSE or impact any heritage trees designated by
the Heritage Tree Program. The proposed area of disturbance does not support sensitive resources that are protected
by local policies and plans. The project would not conflict with any policies or plans. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
f)The project site is not part of a local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan; therefore, no impact would occur
as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1. Vegetation Removal Timing. Vegetation removal and initial site disturbance for any project elements shall be
conducted between September 1st and January 31st outside of the nesting season for birds. If vegetation removal is
planned for the nesting bird season (February 1st to August 31st), then preconstruction nesting bird surveys shall be
required within one week prior to construction activities to determine if any active nests would be impacted by project
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 29
construction. If no active nests are found and vegetation removal is conducted within 5 days of the survey and is done
continuously, then no further survey work shall be required. Additional surveys during the nesting season shall be
conducted as needed if there is any break in vegetation removal, grading and/or construction lasting more than 5 days.
If any active nests are found that would be impacted by vegetation removal, grading and/or construction, then the nest
sites shall be avoided with the establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone around active nests as determined by a
qualified biologist. Nest sites shall be avoided and protected within the non-disturbance buffer zone until the young are
no longer reliant on the nest site for survival (have fledged) as determined by a qualified biologist. All workers shall
receive training on good housekeeping practices during construction that will discourage nests from being established
within the work area (e.g., cover stored pipe ends, cover all equipment being used daily, etc.) A qualified biologist shall
regularly walk the construction area to look for nest starts and review site for good housekeeping practices. As such,
avoiding disturbance or take of an active nest would reduce potential impacts on nesting birds to a less-than-significant
level.
BIO-2. Clean Water Act Permitting. The applicant shall obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory compliance in the form
of a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) or written documentation from the Corps that no permit
would be required for the proposed road crossing. Should a permit be required, the applicant shall implement all the
terms and conditions of the permit to the satisfaction of the Corps. Corps permits and authorizations require applicants
to demonstrate that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and
minimizes impacts on aquatic resources to the extent practicable. Compliance with Corps permitting would also include
obtaining and CWA 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In
addition, the Corps and RWQCB may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable permanent impacts on waters
of the U.S./State to achieve the goal of a no net loss of wetland values and functions. As such, with implementation of
the 3:1 ratio of creek enhancement mitigation plantings and regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on
waters of the U.S. to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-3. Streambed Alteration Agreement. The applicant shall obtain compliance with Section 1602 of the California Fish
and Game Code (Streambed Alteration Agreements) in the form of a completed Streambed Alteration Agreement or
written documentation from the CDFW that no agreement would be required for the proposed road crossing. Should an
agreement be required, the property owners shall implement all the terms and conditions of the agreement to the
satisfaction of the CDFW. The CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement process encourages applicants to demonstrate
that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts in
the stream zone. In addition, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation for unavoidable permanent impacts on waters
of the State. As such, with implementation of the 3:1 ratio of creek enhancement mitigation plantings and regulatory
compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the U.S. to a less-than-significant level.
BIO-4. Wetland Replacement and Riparian Enhancement Plan. The applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to prepare a
wetland replacement and riparian enhancement plan. The plan shall provide for a minimum of 3:1 mitigation area for
the wetland area to be impacted and shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Corps, RWQCB, and CDFW. The
plantings for the riparian enhancement area shall include native species and shall be placed in a manner to ensure their
success. The plan shall include a cost estimate for the implementation of the plantings. The applicant shall implement
the wetland replacement and riparian enhancement plan within 60 days of completion of grading and site disturbance
activities.
BIO-5. Wetland Replacement and Riparian Enhancement Plan Monitoring. The applicant shall retain a qualified biologist
or landscape architect for the purpose of monitoring the success of the mitigation planting area. The monitoring contract
shall include a requirement that the monitor conduct, at a minimum, an annual site visit and assessment of the planting
success for 10 years and an annual submittal of a monitoring report to the City Community Development Department
and Sustainability & Natural Resources Official. The applicant shall also post a bond for the cost of implementing the
mitigation planting. If the monitoring demonstrates that the plan has been successfully implemented, the bond shall be
returned. If the monitoring demonstrates that the plan has not been successfully implemented, the applicant shall submit
a revised plan for review and approval. If the revised plan successfully implemented after two years, the City
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 30
Community Development Department and Sustainability & Natural Resources Official shall use the bond to hire a
licensed landscape architect to implement and maintain the revised plan.
Conclusion
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
5.CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource pursuant to §15064.5?
12, 23,
24, 25 ☐☐☒☐
b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
12, 24,
25, 36 ☐☒☐☐
c)Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?26, 36 ☐☒☐☐
Evaluation
Pre-Historic Setting: As outlined in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American
groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast for at least 10,000 years, and that Native American use of the
central coast region may have begun during the late Pleistocene, as early as 9000 B.C., demonstrating that historical resources
began their accumulation on the central coast during the prehistoric era. The city of San Luis Obispo is located within the area
historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash
occupied much of San Luis Obispo County, including the Arroyo Grande area, and from the Santa Maria River north to
approximately Point Estero. The earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the
coast.
Historic Resource Setting: The area of San Luis Obispo became colonialized by the Spanish Incursion initially in 1542, with the
first official settlement on Chumash Territory occurring in 1772, when the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was established.
By the 1870s (after the earliest arrivals of Chinese immigrants in 1869), a Chinatown district had been established in the
downtown area near Palm and Morro Street. By 1875, 2,500 residents were documented in a 4-square mile area around what is
now the City of San Luis Obispo. By 1901, the City was served by the Pacific Coast Railway and mainline Southern Pacific, and
in 1903 the California Polytechnic State University was established. The last era of growth generally lasted from 1945 to the
present. Many of the residential subdivisions in the Foothill and Laguna Lake area were developed between 1945 and 1970 and
the city’s population increased by 53% during this time.
The City’s COSE establishes various goals and policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other
community goals. These policies include, but are not limited to the following:
a)Identification, preservation, and rehabilitation of significant historic and architectural resources;
b)Prevention of demolition of historically or architecturally significant buildings unless doing so is necessary to
remove a threat to health and safety;
c)Consistency in the design of new buildings in historical districts to reflect the form, spacing and materials of nearby
historic structures; and
d)Identification and protection of neighborhoods or districts having historical character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties
Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants (CCARC), April 2018 Analysis: The purpose of this study was to determine
if there are cultural resources within the study area, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as
amended, (Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1) and Sections 5020 through 5024 of the Public Resources Code which mandates public
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 31
agencies to consider the effects of projects on historic properties. These regulations require public agencies to identify the
environmental impacts of proposed undertakings, determine if the impacts will be significant and identify alternatives and
mitigation measures that will substantially reduce or eliminate significant impacts to the environment. The CCARC study also
adheres to the standards established by the San Luis Obispo County Department of Planning and Building, “A Guide to
Archaeology and Historic Resources”.
Archival research focused on primary and secondary sources to develop a general historic context and lot-specific information
for the immediate project area. To identify previously recorded archaeological and historical sites, archaeological site records,
site location base maps, GIS layers, and cultural resources survey and excavation reports on file at the Central Coast Information
Center (CCIC), University of California, Santa Barbara were reviewed. The records search included information on all surveys
within a 0.25-mile radius of the current project area and sites within a 0.5-mile radius. In addition to this research effort, CCRAC
consulted the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) via the National Register Information Service (NRIS), the official
online database of the NRHP; the California Inventory of Historic Resources (California 1976); and the California Historical
Landmarks (California 1995). The comprehensive records search revealed the current study area has not been surveyed and no
known cultural resources are within, or in the immediate vicinity of, the current study area. Over 29 cultural resources studies
have been conducted within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site, the majority of which, are for small lot surveys, land use
planning, and infrastructure development. Of the five documented surveys adjacent to the current study area (Bertrando 2013;
Conway 1999, 2004, 2005; Mikkelsen et al. 2001), no cultural resources were discovered within, or in the vicinity of, the 365
Prado Road survey area. Three studies (i.e., Conway 1999, 2004; Mikkelsen et al. 2001) overlap with the current study area and
the documents reveal no resources were identified on a highly modified landform. Gibson’s (1993, 2001) intensive surveys in
the Tank Farm road region also failed to identify cultural resources. Additionally, knowledge on the current survey area suggests
a low likelihood of archaeological deposits within the project area. Three prehistoric archaeological sites (CA-SLO-785, -1427,
and -2044) are recorded within 0.5-mile of the project area on a landform that has been subject to severe alteration during
construction of residential buildings, roads, landscaping, and utilities. The closest site is CA-SLO-1427, situated approximately
0.28 mile north (Dills 1990). Approximately 0.33 mile southeast of the project site (along Route 227) is CA-SLO-2044, a highly
disturbed, redeposited marine shell scatter (Mikkelsen et al. 2001). CA-SLO-785 (a spare marine shell scatter) is situated
approximately 0.36 mile southeast of the project site (Dills 1994). Also, in the same vicinity of the project area is the expansive
Union Oil Company Tank Farm (P-40-041195), which consists of an extensive oil tank farm and associated infrastructure
(Conway 2008). Reports on file at the CCIC revealed that no archaeological materials associated with these sites have been found
on the surface or during construction adjacent to the project site.
In an effort to ensure the Northern Chumash community is apprised of the project, CCARC called individuals that had expressed
an interest to CCARC regarding the current undertaking. The proposed project was reviewed and CCARC provided the results
of the records search and field survey of the project area. Prior to the field study Fred Collins, a representative of the Northern
Chumash Tribal Council, was contacted (March 20, 2018). Mr. Collins was the only Tribal representative to return CCARC calls
(on March 21-22, 2018), and a collaborative conversation resulted in no cultural resources concerns within the project area.
Although located within an area of moderate archaeological sensitivity, archival research, previous surveys, initial consultation
with the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, and an intensive archaeological field survey of the project area located at the
Northwest Corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road San Luis Obispo, California identified no cultural resources. No further
archaeological work was required or recommended for the project site.
a)The project site is not designated or listed as a historic resource and not located within a historic district. There are
no historic structures on the site. Impacts would be less than significant.
b)Although no known archaeological resources were found on the site through survey work, and the potential for
finding such resources is low, there is always the potential that unknown buried resources may be discovered through
site grading and construction activities. No further archaeological work is recommended per the CCARC cultural
resources survey. In the event cultural resources or human resources are discovered during construction activities,
Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 are required. Impacts would be less than significant with prescribed mitigation.
c)The project site is not located within a designated burial sensitivity area and the project is not considered an
archaeologically sensitive site as described in the CCARC study or the City’s Archaeological Resource Preservation
Program Guidelines. No further archaeological work is recommended per the CCARC cultural resources survey. In
the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, California State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 and LUO Section 22.10.040 (Archaeological Resources) require that no further disturbances shall
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 32
occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to California
PRC Section 5097.98. With adherence to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and LUO Section 22.10.040,
impacts related to the unanticipated disturbance of archaeological resources and human remains would be reduced
to less than significant Mitigation measures CR-1 and CR-2 would ensure that any previously unknown human
remains that could be uncovered would be properly mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
CR-1 Halt Work Order for Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical or
archaeological remains are discovered during earth disturbing activities associated with the project, construction
activities shall cease, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location
of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified specialist (paleontologist, historian, archaeologist) and
disposition of artifacts may be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native American tribal representative shall monitor any
mitigation excavation associated with Native American materials.
CR-2. Halt Work Order for Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are unearthed, the applicant
shall notify the City Community Development Department and shall comply with State Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, which requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County of San Luis Obispo Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must
be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner
will notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may
recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native
American burials.
Conclusion
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
6.ENERGY
Would the project:
a)Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation?☐☐☒☐
b)Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) has historically been the primary electricity provider for the City. In October of 2018,
the City Council committed to joining Monterey Bay Community Power (MBCP). MBCP is an existing community choice
energy program that serves the counties of Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey and provides 100 percent carbon free electricity
with a rate savings relative to PG&E. Additionally, the City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New
Buildings, which encourages clean, efficient, and cost effective all-electric new buildings through incentives and local
amendments to the California Energy Code. When paired with cost comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free
electricity from MBCP, all-electric new buildings are operationally greenhouse gas emissions-free, cost effective, and help
achieve the community’s climate action goals.
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of
materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 33
property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards for residential and nonresidential structures, the most recent
version of which are referred to as the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These standards focus on four key areas:
smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the
exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and non-residential lighting requirements.
The City is currently developing local amendments to the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) to encourage all-electric new
buildings. When paired with Monterey Bay Community Power's carbon free electricity supply, all electric new buildings are
carbon free and avoid health and safety issues associated with fossil fuels and GHGs. At its meeting on Tuesday, June 16, 2020,
the City Council adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program. Unlike other cities that are banning natural gas entirely, the proposed
Clean Energy Choice Program will provide options to people who want to develop new buildings with natural gas. New projects
wishing to use natural gas will be required to build more efficient and higher performing buildings and offset natural gas use by
performing retrofits on existing buildings or by paying an in-lieu fee that will be used for the same purpose.
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is an internationally recognized green building certification system
that provides third-party verification that a building or community was designed and built using strategies aimed at improving
performance metrics in energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, improved indoor environmental quality, and
stewardship of resources and sensitivity to their impacts. LEED provides a point system to score green building design and
construction. The system is categorized in nine basic areas: Integrative Process, Location and Transportation, Sustainable Sites,
Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, Innovation in Design, and
Regional Priority. Buildings are awarded points based on the extent various sustainable strategies are achieved. The more points
awarded the higher the level of certification achieved from Certified, Silver, Gold, to Platinum (source reference 22).
The City’s COSE establishes goals and policies to achieve energy conservation and increase use of cleaner, renewable, and
locally controlled energy sources. These goals include increasing the use of sustainable energy sources and reducing reliance on
non-sustainable energy sources to the extent possible and encouraging the provision for and protection of solar access. Policies
identified to achieve these goals include, but are not limited to, use of best available practices in energy conservation,
procurement, use and production, energy-efficiency improvements, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly facility design, fostering
alternative transportation modes, compact, high-density housing, and solar access standards.
The City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), adopted in 2012 and currently in the process of being updated, also identifies strategies
and policies to increase use of cleaner and renewable energy resources in order to achieve the City’s greenhouse gas emissions
reduction target. These strategies include promoting a wide range of renewable energy financing options, incentivizing renewable
energy generation in new and existing developments, and increasing community awareness of renewable energy programs
(source reference 24).
a)During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment.
The energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar
construction activities in the city. State and federal regulations in place require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles
and prohibit wasteful activities, such as diesel idling; therefore, potential impacts associated with construction
energy use would be less than significant.
The project would rely on the local electricity service provider, MBCP, to supply project electricity needs. MBCP
provides 100 percent carbon-free electricity.
Operation of the project would result in an overall increase in consumption of energy resources associated with
vehicle trips and electricity and natural gas usage by project occupants. The project would be designed in full
compliance with the California Building Code including applicable green building standards, which include thermal
envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and
nonresidential ventilation requirements, and non-residential lighting requirements. The project has been designed in
a manner that would provide access to public transit (existing and future bus stops), provision of bicycle facilities,
and would locate development within an infill site. Compliance with existing building codes and use of 100%
greenhouse gas-free energy resources would ensure the project would not result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
b)The project would be designed in full compliance with the California Building Code, including applicable green
building standards. The project would be consistent with energy goals and policies in the City’s COSE associated
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 34
with use of best available practices in energy conservation, encouraging energy-efficient “green-buildings”, and
pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly design. The project would also be consistent with the goals and policies set forth in
the City’s Climate Action Plan associated with renewable energy and energy efficiency. Therefore, the project would
not result in a conflict with, or obstruction of, a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
7.GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a)Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i.Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by
the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
4, 17, 29,
48 ☐☐☒☐
ii.Strong seismic ground shaking?4, 17, 48 ☐☐☒☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?4, 17 ☐☐☒☐
iv.Landslides?4, 17 ☐☐☐☒
b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?7, 29 ☐☐☒☐
c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
4, 7, 50,
51 ☐☐☒☐
d)Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2013), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
4, 14, 49 ☐☐☒☐
e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste water?
4, 14, 17 ☐☐☐☒
f)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?50, 52 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
The City’s Safety Element identifies active, potentially active, and inactive mapped and inferred faults with the potential to affect
the city in the event of rupture. The Los Osos Fault, adjacent to the city of San Luis Obispo, is identified under the State of
California Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazards Act and is classified as active. The West Huasna, Oceanic, and Edna faults are considered
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 35
potentially active and present a moderate fault rupture hazard to developments near them. The San Andreas Fault and the offshore
Hosgri Fault, which present the most likely source of ground shaking for San Luis Obispo, have a high probability of producing
a major earthquake within an average lifespan. The highest risk from ground shaking is found on deep soils that were deposited
by water, are geologically recent, and have many pore spaces among the soil grains. These are typically found in valleys (source
reference 27).
Faults capable of producing strong ground shaking motion in San Luis Obispo include the Los Osos, Point San Luis, Black
Mountain, Riconada, Wilmar, Pecho, Hosgri, La Panza, and San Andreas faults. Engineering standards and building codes set
minimum design and construction methods for structures to withstand seismic shaking. Based on the Department of Conservation
Fault Activity Map and the City’s Safety Element Earthquake Faults – Local Area Map, the project site is not located within, or
n the immediate vicinity of, an active fault zone.
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, San Luis Obispo lies within the southern Coast Range Geomorphic Province.
This province lies between the Central Valley of California and the Pacific Ocean and extends from Oregon to northern Santa
Barbara County. The Coast Range province is structurally complex and is comprised of sub-parallel northwest-southeast trending
faults, folds, and mountain ranges.
Rock types in the San Luis Obispo area are mainly comprised of volcanic, metavolcanics, and a mixture of serpentinite and
greywacke sandstone. These rocks are highly fractured and are part of the Mesozoic aged Franciscan Formation. Intrusive and
extrusive volcanic deposits of Tertiary age and marine sedimentary deposits of the Miocene aged Monterey Formation are also
found in the area. The most distinctive geomorphological feature of the San Luis Obispo area is the series of Tertiary aged
volcanic plugs (remnants of volcanoes) which extend from the City of San Luis Obispo northwesterly to Morro Bay. Hollister
Peak, Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, Islay Hill, and Morro Rock are all comprised of these volcanic plugs.
Faulting and Seismic Activity: The predominant northwest-southeast trending structures of the Coast Range Province are related
to the San Andreas Fault Transform Boundary. Other faults in the San Luis Obispo area that are considered active or potentially
active include the San Juan Fault, the East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento Fault Zone, the Oceano Fault, the Oceanic
Fault, Cambria Fault, the Edna Fault, the Hosgri Fault, and the Los Osos Fault. The East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento
Fault Zone, the Cambria Fault, and the Edna Fault have not yet been officially classified by the California Division of Mines and
Geology.
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly known as a Special Studies Zone) is an area within 500 feet from a known
active fault trace that has been designated by the State Geologist. Per the Alquist-Priolo legislation, no structure for human
occupancy is permitted on the trace of an active fault. The portion of the Alquist-Priolo fault zone closest to the city is located
near the southern flank of the Los Osos Valley, northwest of Laguna Lake, but lies just outside of the city limits.
Seismically-Induced Ground Acceleration: Seismically-induced ground acceleration is the shaking motion that is produced by
an earthquake. Probabilistic modeling is done to predict future ground accelerations, taking into consideration design basis
earthquake ground motion, applicable to residential or commercial, or upper-bound earthquake ground motion, applied to public
use facilities like schools or hospitals.
Landslides: Landslides occur when the underlying support can no longer maintain the load of material above it, causing a slope
failure. Ground shaking and landslide hazards are mapped by the City and are shown in the General Plan. Much of the
development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability. However, the city contains
extensive hillsides. Several are underlain by the rocks of the Franciscan group, which is a source of significant slope instability.
The actual risk of slope instability is identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface sampling, by qualified
professionals. The California Building Code requires site-specific investigations and design proposals by qualified professionals
in areas that are susceptible to slope instability and landslides.
Liquefaction: Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid state to a liquefied state as a
consequence of increased pore water pressure. As a result, structures built on this material can sink into the alluvium, buried
structures may rise to the surface or materials on sloped surfaces may run downhill. Other effects of liquefaction include lateral
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 36
spread, flow failures, ground oscillations, and loss of bearing strength. Liquefaction is intrinsically linked with the depth of
groundwater below the site and the types of sediments underlying an area.
The soils in the San Luis Obispo area that are most susceptible to ground shaking, and which contain shallow ground water, are
the ones most likely to have a potential for settlement and for liquefaction. The actual risk of settlement or liquefaction is
identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface sampling, by qualified professionals. Previous investigations
have found that the risk of settlement for new construction can be reduced to an acceptable level through careful site preparation
and proper foundation design, and that the actual risk of liquefaction is low.
Differential Settlement: Differential settlement is the downward movement of the land surface resulting from the compression
of void space in underlying soils. This compression can occur naturally with the accumulation of sediments over porous alluvial
soils within river valleys. Settlement can also result from human activities including improperly placed artificial fill, and
structures built on soils or bedrock materials with differential settlement rates. This phenomenon can alter local drainage patterns
and result in structural damage. Portions of the City have been identified as possibly being underlain by soft organic soils,
resulting in a high potential for settlement (General Plan Safety Element).
Subsidence: Ground subsidence occurs where underlying geologic materials (typically loosely consolidated surficial silt, sand,
and gravel) undergo a change from looser to tighter compaction. As a result, the ground surface subsides (lowers). Where
compaction increases (either naturally, or due to human activity), the geologic materials become denser. As a result, the ground
surface overlying the compacting subsurface materials subsides as the underlying geologic materials settle. Ground subsidence
can occur under several different conditions, including:
•Ground-water withdrawal (water is removed from pore space as the water table drops, causing the ground surface to
settle)
•Tectonic subsidence (ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such as faulting or folding);
and
•Earthquake-induced shaking causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to ground-surface subsidence.
Expansive Soils: Expansive soils are soils that are generally clayey, swell when wetted and shrink when dried. Wetting can occur
in a number of ways (i.e., absorption from the air, rainfall, groundwater fluctuations, lawn watering, broken water or sewer lines,
etc.). Soil expansion can cause subtle damage that can reduce structural integrity. Portions of the city are known to exhibit the
soil types (refer to General Plan Safety Element) identified as having a moderate to high potential for expansion.
The project site is underlain by two soil units, as described below based on the San Luis Obispo County Soil Survey:
127.Cropley clay, 0-2% slopes. This very deep, moderately well-drained, nearly level soil has slow permeability and
slow surface runoff. The hazard of water erosion is slight and the shrink-swell potential of this soil is high. This soil is
well suited to vegetable crops, dryland farming, and pasture. If used for urban development, foundations and footings
should be designed to compensate for the high shrink swell potential and low strength. Septic tank absorption fields do
not function properly because of slow permeability.
120.Conception loam, 2-5% slopes. This very deep, moderately well-drained, gently sloping soil has very slow
permeability and surface runoff is slow. The hazard of water erosion is slight. Building sites and most other engineering
practices often require special design considerations due to the high shrink-swell potential, low strength, and hardness
to pack of the subsoil. Foundations and footings need to be designed to compensate for these soil characteristics. Septic
tank absorption fields do not function properly due to very slow permeability.
Site Specific Analysis: The project site topography includes nearly level conditions with scattered trees and a stockpile of soil
from earlier earth moving activity. Subsurface investigations revealed a silty, clayey sand material, noted by the study authors
as “Site Classification D”, containing a medium range expansion classification, conforming to San Luis Obispo Building Codes.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 37
Perched groundwater was encountered in a thin gravel layer at approximately 9-12 feet in depth. Infiltration testing was also
completed as part of the geotechnical analysis. The analysis indicates that the site does not lie within identified Earthquake Fault
Zones, but closest faults in the vicinity include Los Osos Fault (approximately 2.8 miles southwest) and San Luis Range Fault
(approximately 7.4 miles east). The Rinconada, Hosgri, and San Andreas faults are approximately 10, 23, and 58 miles distance
from the project site, respectively. The analysis concludes that liquefaction and landslide hazards at the site are minimal.
a.i) Based on Figure 3 (Earthquake Faults – Local Area) of the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan and the Department
of Conservation Fault Activity Map of California, no known fault lines are mapped on or within 1 mile of the project site.
Therefore, the project would not have the potential to result in substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known
earthquake fault and impacts would be less than significant.
a.ii) Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area of “High Seismic
Hazards,” specifically Seismic Zone D, which means that future buildings constructed on the site could be subjected to
excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. Structures are required to be designed in compliance with seismic
design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone D and City Codes require new structures be
built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. All project structures would be designed and constructed
in compliance with the California Building Code and all applicable City Building Codes; therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
a.iii) Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within
an area with high liquefaction potential. The soils engineering report prepared for the project found that the potential for
seismic liquefaction of soils at the site is minimal. A soils report prepared by a qualified engineer is required upon review
of the building permit to address the nature of the subsurface soils in response to liquefaction potential, in accordance with
the California Building Code Chapter 18, any issues identified in the report would be addressed through standard site
construction techniques, as required by the Code. In addition, the proposed development would be required to be designed
in compliance with standard seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code to reduce risk associated
with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations,
impacts related to causing substantial adverse effects due to seismic-related ground failure would be less than significant.
a.iv) Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within
an area with low landslide potential. Therefore, the project would not result in significant adverse effects associated with
landslides and no impacts would occur.
b)The project would result in approximately 46,595 cubic yards of cut and 45,466 cubic yards of fill. No substantial
permanent changes in existing topography would occur. Projects that disturb one acre of soil or more are required to obtain
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water
Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit), Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. The General Permit
requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to protect stormwater runoff, including measures to prevent soil erosion. Because more
than one acre of land would be disturbed during the construction phase, the applicant would be required to prepare a
SWPPP and obtain a storm water permit from the RWQCB. Compliance with permit conditions would require
implementation of erosion control BMPs. Because construction activities would require implementation of erosion control
measures, as required by the SWPPP and existing City standards, impacts associated with erosion during construction
would be minimal. Following project completion, the project site would be developed with buildings, hardscapes, or
otherwise landscaped, precluding the potential for substantial erosion or loss of topsoil. Therefore, impacts related to soil
erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant.
c)Landslides typically occur in areas with steep slopes or in areas containing escarpments. Based on the Ground Shaking
and Landslide Hazards Map in the City’s Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low landslide
potential. Based on the City’s Safety Element and USGS data, the project is not located in an area of historical or current
land subsidence. Based on the geotechnical analysis prepared for the project, liquefaction and landslide hazards at the site
are minimal. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 38
d)Based on the Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County, the project site is located in an area underlain by soils with moderate-
to-high shrink-swell potential. The volume changes that soils undergo in this cyclical pattern can stress and damage slabs
and foundations. All proposed structures would be designed and constructed to comply with CBC requirements to
minimize safety hazards associated with expansive soils, including incorporation of the geotechnical report
recommendations for foundation type and design criteria and provisions to mitigate the effects of expansive soils, as
necessary therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) The project site will be connected to the City’s wastewater collection and disposal system and will, therefore, not require
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems on the project site. No impact would occur as a result of
the proposed project.
f)The project site is underlain by Holocene-age alluvial gravel and sand of stream channels (source reference 29). Holocene
age units, particularly those younger than 5,000 years old, are generally too young to contain fossilized material; therefore,
paleontological resources are not expected to be present at the project site. Potential impacts to paleontological resources
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
8.GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
13, 20,
21 ☐☒☐☐
b)Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
13, 20,
21, 33 ☐☒☐☐
Evaluation
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere and are different from the criteria
pollutants discussed in Section 3, Air Quality, above. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of
human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. In 2012, the City of San
Luis Obispo established a Climate Action Plan that identified measures and implementation strategies in order to achieve the
City’s GHG reduction target of 1990 emission levels by 2020. In addition, the City is currently developing a plan for achieving
carbon neutrality by 2035. The City’s 2005 community-wide GHG emissions inventory showed that 50% of the city’s GHG
emissions came from transportation, 22% came from commercial and industrial uses, 21% came from residential uses, and 7%
came from waste.
In response to an increase in man-made GHG concentrations over the past 150 years, California has implemented legislation to
reduce statewide emissions. Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) codifies the Statewide goal of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020
(essentially a 15% reduction below 2005 emission levels) and the adoption of regulations to require reporting and verification of
statewide GHG emissions. Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) extends AB 32, requiring the State to further reduce GHGs to 40 percent below
1990 levels by 2030. Other statewide policies adopted to reduce GHG emissions include AB 32, SB 375, SB 97, Clean Car
Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, California Building codes, and the California Solar
Initiative.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 39
On December 14, 2017, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework
for achieving the 2030 statewide target set by SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project-level thresholds for land
use development. Instead, it recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally-appropriate quantitative thresholds
consistent with a statewide per capita goal of 6 metric tons (MT) CO2e by 2030 and 2 MT CO2e by 2050 (ARB 2017). As stated
in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan-level analyses (city, county, subregional, or regional level),
but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the State.
Plans, policies, and guidelines have been established at the regional and local levels to address GHG emissions and climate
change effects within the city. In March 2012, the SLOAPCD approved thresholds for GHG emission impacts and these
thresholds have been incorporated into the CEQA Air Quality Handbook and updated in 2017 with a clarification memorandum.
According to the adopted SLOAPCD guidance, the following three quantitative thresholds may be used to evaluate the level of
significance of GHG emissions impacts for residential and commercial projects:
1)Qualified GHG Reduction Plan. A project would have a significant impact if it is not consistent with a qualified GHG
reduction strategy that meets the requirements of the State CEQA Guidelines. If a project is consistent with a qualified
GHG reduction strategy, it would not have a significant impact; OR,
2)Bright-Line Threshold. A project would have a significant impact if it would generate GHG emissions in excess of the
“bright-line threshold” of 1,150 MT of CO2e per year; OR,
3)Efficiency Threshold. A project would have a significant impact if it would generate GHG emissions in excess of the
efficiency threshold of 4.9 MT of CO2e per service population per year. The service population is defined as the number
of residents plus employees for a given project.
The efficiency threshold is specifically intended to avoid penalizing large-scale plans or projects that incorporate emissions-
reducing features and/or that are located in a manner that results in relatively low vehicle miles traveled. The SLOAPCD GHG
quantitative thresholds were developed to help reach the AB 32 emission reduction targets for the year 2020. The SLOAPCD
has not yet updated these thresholds to reflect SB 32 emission reduction goals.
The City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan (CAP), adopted in 2012, serves as the City’s qualified GHG reduction strategy.
The GHG-reducing policy provisions contained in the CAP were prepared with the purpose of complying with the requirements
of AB 32 and achieving the goals of the AB 32 Scoping Plan, which have a horizon year of 2020. Therefore, the City’s CAP is
not considered a qualified GHG reduction strategy for assessing the significance of GHG emissions generated by projects with
a horizon year post-2020.
The City is in the process of updating its CAP. A public review draft has been released and is expected to be adopted later this
year. The plan establishes a community-wide goal of carbon neutrality by 2035, adopts sector specific goals, and provides
foundational actions to establish a trajectory towards achieving those goals. Appendix C of the CAP Update includes thresholds
and guidance for the preparation of GHG emissions analysis under CEQA for project within the City. To support progress toward
the City’s long‐term aspirational carbon neutrality goal, plans and projects within the City that undergo CEQA review will need
to demonstrate consistency with targets in the CAP, which will be a Qualified GHG Emissions Reduction Plan, consistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, upon adoption of its CEQA review document, specifically the CAP Initial Study‐Negative
Declaration (IS‐ND), and approval of the CAP by City Council (City of SLO 2020).
In October of 2018, the City Council committed to joining Monterey Bay Community Power (MBCP). MBCP is an existing
community choice energy program that serves the counties of Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey and provides 100 percent
carbon free electricity with a rate savings relative to PG&E. Additionally, the City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice
Program for New Buildings, which encourages clean, efficient, and cost effective all-electric new buildings through incentives
and local amendments to the California Energy Code. When paired with cost comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-
free electricity from MBCP, all-electric new buildings are operationally greenhouse gas emissions-free, cost effective, and help
achieve the community’s climate action goals.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 40
a), b) The primary sources of direct and indirect GHG emissions have been calculated for year 2024. As shown
below in Table 6, annual emissions associated with implementation of the proposed project would be 3.9 MT of
CO2e per service person, which would not exceed the current SLOAPCD efficiency threshold of 4.9MT of CO2e
per service person.
Table 6. Year 2024 Annual GHG Emissions
Emission Source Year 2024 GHG Emissions
(MT of CO2e)
Construction1 83.33
Area Sources 3.18
Energy Use 02
Mobile Sources 891.79
Solid Waste Disposal 236.39
Water Use 36.40
Total 1,251.09
Service Population 318.25
GHG Emissions per Service Population 3.9
See Attachment 4b for modeling results.
1Construction emissions were amortized over a 25 year period per SLOAPCD guidance.
2Based on the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings and the Monterey Bay Community Power.
Additionally, the project would be consistent with the City’s CAP Update, if adopted, as listed below:
-The Specific Plan amendment would result in an equivalent or less GHG-intensive project when compared to
the existing designation.
-The project would comply with requirements related to bicycle parking, bikeway design, and EV charging
stations.
-The project is located in an area of the City where residential VMT per capita is below the City’s impact
threshold of 14.25 per the City’s Transportation Impact Study Guidelines screening map.
-The proposed commercial center is less than 50,000 square-feet and per the City’s Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines can be assumed to cause a less-than-significant impact to VMT.
-The project demonstrates compliance with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan.
-The project complies with the Municipal Code requirements for trees.
-The proposed project would locate mixed-use development in close proximity to stops on the SLO Transit 1A
(Johnson/Tank Farm) route, as well as commercial business park and industrial uses south of Tank Farm and
east of Broad Street.
The project would not conflict with any of the goals, policies, and programs of the existing CAP or the CAP Update,
and is therefore considered to be consistent with the CAP and CAP Update.
To ensure the project does not result in CO2e emissions resulting from energy sources, Mitigation Measure GHG-1
would require an operational commitment to participate in Monterey Bay Community Power. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 41
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is required to ensure GHG emissions from energy sources are less than significant.
GHG-1 Monterey Bay Community Power
Prior to final inspection, occupancy, or establishment of the use, the applicant shall demonstrate that the subject use has made an
operational commitment to participate in Monterey Bay Community Power. Any rental or lease agreement for individual tenant
spaces shall include a requirement that the tenant continue participation in Monterey Bay Community Power. This participation
shall continue until PG&E or another electric provider provides 100 percent carbon-free electricity, at which point the applicant
or tenant may elect to switch services to such a provider.
Conclusion
Less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
9.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
4, 9 ☐☐☒☐
b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
2, 4, 9 ☐☐☒☐
c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
9, 10 ☐☐☒☐
d)Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
9, 31 ☐☐☐☒
e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
1, 4, 27,
43 ☐☐☒☐
f)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
4, 27 ☐☐☒☐
g)Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?4, 9, 27 ☐☐☒☐
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 42
Evaluation
As described in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, the analysis of hazards and hazardous material impacts relates to hazards
regarding safety risks posed by airport flight patterns, conflicts with adopted emergency response/evacuation plans, and wildland
fires where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas; and hazardous materials or substances regarding routine transport or
disposal of substances, explosion or release of substances, and emissions or handling of substances within 0.25 mile of an existing
or planned school. The following is a brief outline of the primary identified hazards.
Fire Hazards: Fires have the potential to cause significant losses to life, property, and the environment. Urban fire hazards
result from the materials that make up the built environment, the size and organization of structures, and spacing of buildings.
Additional factors that can accelerate fire hazards are availability of emergency access, available water volume and pressure for
fire suppression, and response time for fire fighters. Fire hazard severity in rural areas, including areas on the edge between urban
and rural land (commonly called the wildland interface), are highly influenced by the slope of the landscape and site vegetation
and climate. This risk is somewhat amplified by the native, Mediterranean vegetation common to the rural setting in which the
City is located that has evolved to rely on wildfires for its ecological sustainability. Where wildland fires may be a threat, plant
fuels are often managed by replacement planting, grazing, plowing, or mechanical clearing.
Hazardous Materials: Hazardous materials are defined as substances with physical and chemical properties of ignitability,
corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity which may pose a threat to human health or the environment. This includes, for example,
chemical materials such as petroleum products, solvents, pesticides, herbicides, paints, metals, asbestos, and other regulated
chemical materials. Additionally, hazards include known historical spills, leaks, illegal dumping, or other methods of release of
hazardous materials to soil, sediment, groundwater, or surface water. If a historical release exists, then there is a risk associated
with disturbing the historical release area. The potential for risks associated with hazardous materials are varied regionally. The
primary risk concerns identified by the City, as stipulated in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, include radiation hazards
and the transportation of hazardous materials in and around the city. Most of these incidents are related to the increasing
frequency of transport of chemicals over roadways, railways or through industrial accidents. Highway 101 and a rail corridor are
major transportation corridors through the San Luis Obispo area.
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and developers
to comply with CEQA requirements related to the disclosure of information about the location of hazardous materials release
sites. Government Code section 65962.5 requires the California EPA (CalEPA) to develop at least annually an updated Cortese
List. Various state and local government agencies are required to track and document hazardous material release information for
the Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s (DTSC’s) EnviroStor database tracks DTSC cleanup,
permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known contamination, such as
federal superfund sites, state response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school cleanup sites, school investigation sites, and military
evaluation sites. The State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) GeoTracker database contains records for sites that
impact, or have the potential to impact, water in California, such as Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites,
Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program Sites. The remaining data regarding facilities or sites identified as meeting
the “Cortese List” requirements can be located on the CalEPA website: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
Based on a review of the Cortese List, SWRCB’s Geotracker database, and the DTSC’s EnviroStor database, the project site is
not an active hazardous waste cleanup site. The closest investigation site is located approximately 0.4 mile south. The project
site is located within the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport Land Use Planning Area (ALUP).
Airport Hazards: The San Luis Obispo County Airport provides commuter, charter, and private aviation service to the area.
The primary hazard associated with land uses near the airport is the risk of aircraft incidents on approach and take-off. Aircraft
flight operations are determined largely by the physical layout of the airport and rules of the Federal Aviation Administration.
The County manages activities on the airport property through the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). As the means of
fulfilling these basic obligations, the ALUC must prepare and adopt Airport Land Use Plans (ALUPs) for each airport within
their jurisdiction. The policies in the ALUP are intended to minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards
while providing for the orderly expansion of airports (Public Utility Code Section 21670(a)(2). The ALUC has developed an
ALUP for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport that was first adopted in 1973, was most recently updated in May 2005,
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 43
and is currently being updated. The ALUP has identified safety zones with associated land use density and intensity restrictions.
The ALUP defines these as:
•Runway Protection Zones – Areas immediately adjacent to the ends of each active runway, within which the level of
aviation safety risk is very high and in which, consequently, structures are prohibited and human activities are restricted
to those which require only very low levels of occupancy.
•Safety Areas S-1 a through c – The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of
reduced visibility at altitudes less than 500 feet above ground level (AGL).
•Safety Area S-2 – The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility
at altitudes between 501 and 1,000 feet above ground level (AGL). Because aircraft in Area S-2 are at greater altitude
and are less densely concentrated than in other portions of the Airport Planning Area, the overall level of aviation safety
risk is considered to be lower than that in Area S-1 or the Runway Protection Zones.
a)The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of the proposed project would be required to comply
with applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes. Commonly used hazardous materials would be used in
varying amounts during construction and occupancy of the project. Construction and maintenance activities would
use hazardous materials such as fuels (gasoline and diesel), oils, and lubricants, paints and paint thinners, glues;
cleaners (which could include solvents and corrosives in addition to soaps and detergents);; and possibly pesticides
and herbicides. The amount of materials used would be small, so the project would not create a significant hazard
to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as such
uses would have to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations including, but not limited to, Titles
8 and 22 of the CCR, the Uniform Fire Code, and Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code.
With respect to operation of the project, it is not anticipated the Westmont Living facility or the allowed uses of the
AASP (assisted living, bank and credit unit, general market, office, retail sales and personal service, or restaurant)
would generate significant amounts of hazardous materials. Any future medical office use would have the potential
to generate biological, pharmaceutical, radioactive, or chemotherapeutic waste. This medical waste would be subject
to the disposal requirements of the Medical Waste Management Act and California Health and Safety Code 117690.
This issue would be considered a less-than-significant impact.
b)The proposed project would not result in the routine transport, use, disposal, handling, or emission of any hazardous
materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. Implementation of Title 49,
Parts 171–180, of the Code of Federal Regulations and stipulations in the General Plan Safety Element would reduce
any impacts associated with the potential for accidental release during construction or occupancy of the proposed
project or by transporters picking up or delivering hazardous materials to the project site. These regulations establish
standards by which hazardous materials would be transported within and to/from the project site. Where transport
of these materials occurs on roads, the California Highway Patrol is the responsible agency for enforcement of
regulations. Compliance with existing regulations would ensure impacts related to hazardous materials exposure
would be less than significant.
c)The proposed project is an assisted-living residential development with potential future commercial and office uses,
parking, and associated amenities, and is not located within 0.5 mile of a school. The proposed project would not
result in the routine transport, use, disposal, handling, or emission of any hazardous materials that would create a
significant hazard to the public or to the environment; therefore, this is considered a less-than-significant impact.
d)The project site is not on a parcel included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 (DTSC 2012) and, as a result, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment; therefore, no impact would occur.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 44
e)The project site is located in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and the County ALUP
area. The project site is subject to the City’s Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ), which allows development based on the
development standards for the zone (Table 10, Zoning Regulations). Because the proposed project includes an
amendment to the AASP, the project was referred to the ALUC for a determination of consistency. On August 15,
2018, and again on September 19, 2018, the San Luis Obispo County ALUC reviewed the proposed project for
consistency with the ALUP. On September 19th the ALUC found the Westmont Living facility and a similar
commercial center project consistent with the ALUP based on a series of findings and conditions that would render
the project consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (Attachment 5). Future development on the eastern portion of
the project site would require a consistency finding with the Airport Land Use Plan and could result in additional
conditions from the ALUC. With incorporation of all conditions from the ALUC, impacts would be less than
significant in terms of safety hazards to those living and working on the project site.
f)The Fire Marshal has reviewed the design of the project and determined that the project would not interfere with
any emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plans; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
g)The project site is not located within or adjacent to a wildland area and the project would not expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
10.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
5, 9, 15 ☐☐☒☐
b)Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
5, 9, 15,
17 ☐☐☒☐
c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i.Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site;5, 9, 15,
17 ☐☐☒☐
ii.Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
5, 9, 15,
17 ☐☐☒☐
iii.Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
5, 9, 15,
17 ☐☐☒☐
iv.Impede or redirect flood flows?5, 9, 17 ☐☐☐☒
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 45
d)In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?4, 9, 17 ☐☐☐☒
e)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, the project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic
Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, an area that corresponds to the coastal draining watersheds west of the Coastal
Range. The Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County
line and includes numerous individual stream systems. Within the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, the San Luis Obispo Creek
watershed drains approximately 84 square miles.
The city of San Luis Obispo is generally located within a low-lying valley centered on San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo
Creek is one of four major drainage features that create flood hazards in the city, with the others being Stenner Creek, Prefumo
Creek, and Old Garden Creek. In addition, many minor waterways drain into these creeks, and these can also present flood
hazards. Because of the high surrounding hills and mountains in the area, the drainage sheds of these creeks are relatively small,
but the steep slopes and high gradient can lead to intense, fast moving flood events in the city.
According to the Central Coast RWQCB, water quality in the San Luis Obispo Creek drainage system is generally considered to
be good. However, the water quality fluctuates along with seasonal changes in flow rates. In summer months, when the flows
decrease, and dilution is reduced, water quality decreases. According to the RWQCB Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Project for San Luis Obispo Creek, the creek has been reported to exceed nutrient and pathogen levels.
Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo Valley Sub-basin flows toward the south-southwest, following the general gradient of
surface topography. Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo area is considered suitable for agricultural water supply, municipal
and domestic supply, and industrial use.
The City is enrolled in the State General Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
governing stormwater. As part of this enrollment, the City is required to implement the Central Coast RWQCB’s adopted Post
Construction Stormwater Management requirements through the development review process. The primary objective of these
post-construction requirements is to ensure that the permittee is reducing pollutant discharges to the maximum extent practicable
and preventing stormwater discharges from causing or contributing to a violation of receiving water quality standards in all
applicable development projects that require approvals and/or permits issued.
The 100-year flood zone identifies areas that would be subject to inundation in a 100-year storm event, or a storm with a 1%
chance of occurring in any given year. Based on the City’s Flood Preparedness Map, the project site is not located within a 100-
year flood zone.
a)The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantially degrade
water quality because the project is required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in
their Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for development projects in the Central Coast
region. The project would be required to submit a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP). Completion of this project
would ensure that construction-related discharges would be limited or adequately accommodated by properly
engineered infrastructure design.
Preparation and implementation of the SWPPP and associated BMPs would ensure potential impacts associated with
the accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
b)The project would be serviced by the City’s water system, which has four primary water sources, including the
Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation), with
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 46
groundwater serving as a fifth supplemental source. The City no longer draws groundwater for potable purposes as
of 2015. Therefore, the project would not deplete groundwater resources and impacts would be less than significant.
c.i-iii) Construction of the proposed project would result in an increase of impervious surfaces that would cause the timing
and amount of surface water runoff to increase. However, the project is subject to the revised City Storm Drain
Master Plan/Waterway Management Plan that discusses the necessary improvements that would ensure adequate
transmission and detention of storm water flow created by any new development. Physical improvement of the
project site would be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan.
This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed.
The Waterways Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site
development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-
off. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the City’s engineering standards, water pollution
control plan requirements, Post-Construction Stormwater Requirements, and adopted building and grading codes for
water quantity/quality analysis. Compliance with these requirements will ensure impacts are less than significant.
c.iv) The project site is not within the boundaries of an area subject to inundation from flood waters in a 100-year storm
per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map. The project would not impede or redirect the
flow of any waters. Therefore, there would be no impact.
d)The proposed development is outside the zone of impacts from seiche or tsunami and the existing upslope projects
do not generate significant storm water runoff such to create a potential for inundation by mudflow; therefore, no
impact would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e)As discussed in the threshold analysis above, the project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge. The project includes stormwater treatment and storage facilities and would
not conflict with the Central Coastal Basin Plan or other water quality control plans. The project would not conflict
with a sustainable groundwater management plan, or other local or regional plans or policies intended to manage
water quality or groundwater supplies; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
11.LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
a)Physically divide an established community?1, 2, 9,
11 ☐☐☒☐
b)Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
1, 6, 9,
10, 11 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
a) The project site is primarily undeveloped and contains a single-family residence but does not contain an established
community. The proposed project is an infill project and would not have the potential to divide an established
community on adjacent parcels or in the vicinity of the project site. The site is designated for land uses consistent
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 47
with the proposed AASP land use designation of Community Commercial, which would be consistent with the
existing zoning and General Plan Land use designation of the site. The project is designed to be consistent with
existing and developing/planned surrounding commercial infill development and would not physically divide an
established community. Impacts would be less than significant.
b)The Land Use, Circulation, and Housing Elements of the City’s General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance are the
primary land use planning guidance documents for the development pattern of the city. The proposed specific plan
amendment would be consistent with the general plan land use designation and zoning for the property, if amended
as requested. The Westmont Living facility was reviewed on October 15, 2018 by the Architectural Review
Commission and by the Planning Commission on April 10, 2019. The Planning Commission’s recommendation was
introduced to the City Council on May 7, 2019; a second hearing did not occur. Any future development beyond the
Westmont Living facility would be subject to the review of the Architectural Review Commission and Planning
Commission. The following describes the project’s consistency with key General Plan policies, as well as those of
the City’s Airport Area Specific Plan and the Airport Land Use Plan, as adopted by San Luis Obispo County.
As discussed below, the project would be potentially consistent with applicable City goals, policies, and programs,
although a final determination of consistency would be made by the City Council. Policy-related impacts are
anticipated to be less than significant.
General Plan Policy Consistency
The 2014 General Plan establishes several community goals, policies and programs for development that relate to
the project site. These include:
•Special Focus Area #12
•Neighborhood Connections
•Mixed-Use Developments and Convenience
•Neighborhood Compatibility
The project’s consistency with each is discussed below:
1.Special Focus Area #12 – General Plan Policy 8.13 provides that the project site would be a mixed-use
development, providing uses consistent with the “Community Commercial” and “Office” designations. This policy
calls for a strong commercial presence at the corner of Tank Farm and Broad Street, and to emphasize creek
protection and circulation connectivity as noted above in any land plan. The Westmont Living facility and a similar
commercial development was brought to the Planning Commission on June 13, 2018 for a conceptual policy review
to receive early, conceptual comments on the project’s potential consistency with the Special Focus Area policies.
Since the Planning Commission recommendation on April 10, 2019, the applicant has revised the project and is only
moving forward with the Westmont Living facility at this time. The assisted living and memory care facility remains
as originally proposed, with no changes. The applicant has indicated that future development of the eastern portion
of the project site would a revised commercial center, include replacing the proposed grocery store use with a
medical office and reducing the amount of proposed retail/restaurant space. A conceptual site plan of a potential
future development shows that the configuration of structures on the commercial portion of the property would be
altered. Any future development on the eastern portion of the project site, including a revised commercial center,
would require separate application and Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission
determinations. Future development applications are expected to incorporate the Planning Commission and
Architectural Review Commission concerns and comments related to consistency with this General Plan policy.
These comments relate to design features that include:
•Articulated walkways within and along the perimeter of the uses, as well as enhanced connections between
future commercial uses and Westmont Living facility.
•Improvements to future commercial service areas located along the central road access to screen loading
and unloading functions for the uses. This includes landscaping to minimize visibility from off-site.
•Pedestrian meeting areas/plazas to connect pedestrian and bicycle routes into the site.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 48
2.Neighborhood Connections – General Plan Policies 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 discuss planning for connectivity both
internally to a given project, and as that project relates to the larger neighborhood context. The subject site is located
at the northwest corner of Tank Farm Road and Broad Street and the project would provide pedestrian and bicycle
connections to the nearby employment centers at Mindbody and along the Broad Street corridor, and to retail
services at the Marigold Shopping Center. Additionally, vehicle circulation connecting to adjoining development
would be enhanced, providing additional access options to motorists working or visiting the area. Future
development would be reviewed for internal access patterns to promote accessibility from off-site and facilitate
internal access the Westmont Living facility and future commercial uses. The adjacent Agera Grove mixed-use
project would have access into the site via the bridge crossing Orcutt Creek (to be constructed by Agera Grove with
that project). The project would construct an extension of the Mindbody street that would connect to the SESLOC
property and beyond to Industrial Way. The project is consistent with these General Plan policies.
3. Mixed-Use Developments and Convenience – General Plan Policies 2.3.1 and 2.3.6 encourage mixed-use
projects to integrate complementary uses close to one another, and to ultimately cut down on vehicle traffic by
making these mixed-use projects accessible to other nearby neighborhoods. The design of the proposed project
adheres to, and is consistent with, the General Plan policies encouraging retail shopping and food service options
located onsite with residential uses and close to employment centers, transportation corridors, and resident needs.
4.Neighborhood Compatible Development – General Plan Policy 2.3.9 sets several goals for new development
(specifically residential, but equally applicable to “infill” projects) within established neighborhoods. The vicinity
of the proposed project includes a wide mix of commercial, office, professional, business park, manufacturing,
industrial and residential uses. The proposed project includes the potential for a mix of these uses as allowable land
use types. Architectural design of the Westmont Living facility is also consistent with architectural stylings found
in the nearby area. The project also incorporates many of these established architectural styles into a well-designed
center that is compatible with scale and design of these neighborhoods. The project is consistent with this General
Plan policy. Future development on the eastern portion of the project site would be submitted under a separate
application and reviewed for consistency with this policy and the Community Design Guidelines.
Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) Consistency
First adopted by the City Council in 2005, the AASP included a series of goals, policies, and programs to
comprehensively guide development of the Planning Area. Additional guidelines and development standards are
included in the AASP, as well as infrastructure requirements and a plan for implementation of the Plan. In 2014 the
AASP was updated to reflect current planning standards for the area.
Overall goals of the Specific Plan include:
•Provide a framework to move from County developments primarily focused on heavier industrial and
manufacturing uses to a blend of these established uses, both inside and outside the City, with new uses
focused on lighter industrial and manufacturing uses, professional and business park developments,
employment centers, retailing services to support daytime customer demands and limited numbers of
residential developments surrounding the Planning Area.
•Plan for proposed development, including annexations within the Planning Area, so that public facilities
are developed concurrently with new development in a rational and cost- effective fashion.
•Expand the use of bicycles and pedestrians within the Plan Area as an alternative to increasing vehicular
trips.
•Protect and enhance natural resources within the AASP, including emphasis on maintaining visual qualities
of the surrounding hills and open space areas and protection of creek corridors, wetlands and habitat
qualities.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 49
The Westmont Living facility, as designed, addresses each of these goals through its design, and is therefore
consistent with the AASP. Future development on the eastern portion of the project site would be submitted under
a separate application and reviewed for consistency with the AASP.
San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) Consistency
On August 15, 2018, and again on September 19, 2018, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) considered a
referral of this project from the City. On September 19, 2018, the ALUC found the Westmont Living facility and a
similar commercial center project, including amendments to the City’s AASP, were consistent with the County’s
ALUP based on a series of findings and conditions. Future development on the eastern portion of the project site
would require a consistency finding with the Airport Land Use Plan and could result in additional conditions from
the ALUC.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
12.MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
5, 9, 17 ☐☐☐☒
b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
5, 9, 17 ☐☐☐☒
Evaluation
Based on the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element, mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits.
a-b) No known mineral resources are present at the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not result
in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. The project site is not designated by the General Plan, specific
plan, or other land use plans as a locally important mineral recovery site. Therefore, there would be no impact to
mineral resources.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
No impact.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 50
13.NOISE
Would the project result in:
a)Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
3, 9, 10,
11, 40 ☐☒☐☐
b)Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
3, 9, 10,
11 ☐☐☒☐
c)For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or
an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
1, 3, 9,
10, 11,
40 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
Physical Setting
As analyzed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, a number of noise-sensitive land uses are present within the city, including various
types of residential development, schools, hospitals and care facilities, parks and recreation areas, hotels and transient lodging,
and places of worship and libraries. Based on ambient noise level measurements throughout the City, major sources of noise
include traffic noise on major roadways, passing trains, and aircraft overflights.
The project site is located north of Tank Farm Road and west of Broad Street. These two arterial streets are the primary sources
of ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site. The southwest corner of the project site is closest to the San Luis Obispo
County Regional Airport, a separate potential source of nearby noise. Each of these potential sources of noise was observed and
measured to evaluate their contribution to ambient on-site noise levels.
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with users of these land uses.
The following land uses are typically considered noise-sensitive: single-family and multiple-family residences, long-term care
facilities (including convalescent and retirement facilities), dormitories, motels, hotels, transient lodgings and other residential
uses, houses of worship, hospitals, libraries, schools, auditoriums, concert halls, outdoor theaters, nature and wildlife preserves,
and parks. The nearest existing noise-sensitive receivers to the project site include existing and approved future residential land
uses southwest of the project site within a mobile home park (approved for redevelopment with a mixed-use residential
development). The existing mobile home park is located approximately 110 feet from the project boundary and approximately
350 feet from the center of the construction activity on the project site.
Regulatory Setting
City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidebook
The Noise Element and Noise Guidebook (1996) of the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan uses modified land use
compatibility standards recommended by the California Department of Health Services. The following Noise Element policies
are applicable to the project and the local noise environment:
Policy 1.4. New Transportation Noise Sources. Noise created by new transportation noise sources, including road,
railroad, and airport expansion projects, shall be mitigated to not exceed the levels specified in Table 4.10-3 for outdoor
activity areas and indoor spaces of noise-sensitive land uses which were established before the new transportation
noise source.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 51
Policy 1.6. New Development and Stationary Noise Sources. New development of noise-sensitive land uses may be
permitted only where location or design allow the development to meet the standards of Table 4.10-4, for existing
stationary noise sources.
City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control)
Construction noise level limits set by the City are defined in section 9.12.050(6.a.), of the Municipal Code. Table 2 and Table 3
of the noise study included as Attachment 8 summarize the City’s maximum allowable noise levels for short-term or long-term
operation of mobile equipment and stationary equipment at residential properties. Section 9.12.050(6.b.) of the Municipal Code
limits the operation of nonscheduled, intermittent, short-term operation of mobile equipment associated with construction to a
maximum hourly noise level of 85 dBA and the operation of repetitively scheduled and relatively long-term operations of
stationary equipment associated with construction to a maximum hourly noise level of 75 dBA.
Operational vibration level limits set by the City are defined in section 9.12.050(7) or the Municipal Code. Section 9.12.050(7)
limits operation vibration levels to the “perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source
if on private property or at one hundred fifty feet (forty-six meters) from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way.”
The SLOMC defines the perception threshold as a “motion velocity of 0.01” inch per second.
Methods of Assessment
Noise sources examined include vehicular traffic along the two busy ground transportation corridors, as well as operations
associated with the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. In addition, there are potential existing or future stationary noise
sources from neighboring commercial activities along the south boundary of the site.
Ambient noise levels were measured at the project site. SoundPLAN, an acoustic software sound level modeling tool, was used
to generate sound level contours which were based on physical characteristics of the topography, measured sound level values,
and traffic volume data. Sound level measurements were taken on September 30, 2017 with two calibrated Type 1 Sound Level
Meters. The two on-site sound level measurement locations are shown on Figure 7 of the 45dB Acoustics Report (Attachment
7). In addition, a second noise study to assess the project’s potential operational impact on nearby sensitive resources was
prepared by Rincon Consultants and is included as Attachment 8. Please refer to this study for a discussion of the technical nature
of sound and vibration. The results of this study form the basis for the conclusions of this MND. Key aspects of this study are
summarized below.
Significance Thresholds
Construction Noise
Based on the duration of proposed construction activities and the Municipal Code, section 9.12.050(6), construction noise would
be significant if:
•Noise levels exceed a maximum hourly noise level of 65 dBA Leq when measured at the Hidden Hills Mobilodge
(mobile home park); or
•Construction noise exceeds a maximum hourly noise level of 70 dBA Leq at a commercial property.
Construction Vibration
The City has adopted a vibration threshold of 0.01 in/sec peak particle velocity (PPV). However, the City has not adopted a
significance threshold to assess vibration impacts during construction. Therefore, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction
Vibration Guidance Manual (2013) and the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) are used to
evaluate potential construction vibration impacts related to both potential building damage and human annoyance. Based on the
Caltrans and FHWA criteria, construction vibration impacts would be significant if vibration levels exceeds 0.5 in/sec PPV for
residential structures and 1.0 in/sec PPV for commercial and industrial structures, which are the limits where minor architectural
damage may occur to each type of buildings. Human annoyance impacts would occur if vibration levels from long-term
operations exceeded 68 VdB (equal to 0.01 in/sec PPV) at a residence or if a transient source, such as construction, exceeds 94
VdB at any occupied structure.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 52
Project Operational Noise
According to the SLOMC, Section 9.12.060, operational noise from an on-site noise level source would result in a significant
impact if the project would exceed the City noise levels limits at the property line of affected land use as defined in Table 5 of
the Noise Study, included as Attachment 8.
Traffic Noise
Off-site project-related noise (i.e., roadway noise) would result in a significant impact if the project would cause the traffic noise
level measured at the property of affected uses to increase by 3 CNEL to or within the “normally unacceptable” or “clearly
unacceptable” category, or by 5 CNEL or more if existing or future noise levels are below the normally acceptable category..
The City’s General Plan Noise Element establishes standards for maximum acceptable noise levels associated with stationary
and transportation sources. Noise created by new transportation noise sources are required to be mitigated to not exceed the
maximum acceptable noise levels identified in Table 6, below.
Table 6. Maximum Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses due to Transportation Noise Sources
Outdoor Activity
Areas1 Indoor Spaces
Noise-Sensitive Use Ldn or CNEL, in dB
Ldn or
CNEL, in
dB
Leg in
db2 Lmax in db3
Residences, hotels, motels, hospitals, nursing
homes 60 45 -- 60
Theaters, auditoriums, music halls -- -- 35 60
Churches, meeting halls, office building,
mortuaries 60 -- 45 --
Schools, libraries, museums -- -- 45 60
Neighborhood parks 65 -- -- --
Playgrounds 70 -- -- --
1 If the location of outdoor activity areas is not shown, the outdoor noise standard shall apply at the property line of
the receiving land use.
2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
3 Lmax indoor standard applies only to railroad noise at locations south of Orcutt Road.
The City’s Noise Element also identifies Policy 1.4 regarding noise created by new transportation sources, including road,
railroad, and airport expansion projects, which states noise from these sources shall be mitigated to not exceed the levels specified
in Table 6 (above) for outdoor activity areas and indoor spaces of noise-sensitive land uses.
To facilitate potential future CEQA streamlining when a development project application is submitted for the eastern portion of
the project site, this section analyzes the potential noise impacts of conceptual commercial center development.
a)Construction Noise
Construction impacts would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels in the project area on an
intermittent basis and, as such, would expose surrounding sensitive receivers to increased noise levels. Any increase
in noise levels at off-site receptors during construction of the proposed project would be temporary in nature and
would not generate continuously high noise levels, although occasional single-event disturbances from construction
would be possible. In addition, construction noise would typically be higher during the heavier periods of initial
construction (i.e., demolition and grading work) and reduced in the later construction phases (i.e., interior building
construction) because the physical structure of the proposed project would break line-of-sight noise transmission
from the construction area to the nearby sensitive receivers. Furthermore, noise levels would fluctuate depending
on the construction phase, equipment type and duration of use, distance between the noise source and receiver, and
presence or absence of noise attenuation barriers.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 53
The nearest residential receivers from the proposed construction are residences associated with the Hidden Hills
Mobilodge mobile home park, approximately 350 feet to the southwest of the center of proposed construction
activities for the Westmont Living facility, which would be the closest long-term construction activity. Mobile home
parks are considered multiple family residential land uses. The nearest commercial uses are located adjacent to the
south of the project approximately 300 feet from the center of construction activity (Mindbody).
The FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to estimate noise levels from construction
equipment at local residential and commercial receivers. RCNM provides reference noise levels for standard
construction equipment, with an attenuation of 6 dBA per doubling of distance for stationary equipment. Each phase
of construction has a specific equipment mix. The maximum hourly Leq of each phase is determined by combining
the Leq contributions from each piece of equipment used in that phase (FTA 2018). Construction phases would
include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving of the project
site.
In typical construction projects, grading activities generate the highest noise levels because grading involves the
largest equipment and covers the greatest area. For assessment purposes, and to be conservative, the loudest hour
has been used for assessment. The loudest hour of construction would typically occur during site preparation and
foundation excavation. Based on the project construction schedule and proposed development plan, it is anticipated
that a maximum of four large pieces of construction equipment would be active at the same time in the same hour
under maximum load. For modeling purposes, two bulldozers, a frontend loader, and a scraper are used to represent
the loudest pieces of equipment that would be active simultaneously. Based on the FHWA Highway Construction
Noise Handbook (2008), the maximum hourly noise level from all four pieces of equipment would result in a
maximum combined noise level of 108.2 Leq at 300 feet (refer to Appendix D for RCNM results). Table 8 shows
typical construction noise levels associated with the use of heavy construction equipment during site preparation
and foundation excavation at distances of 50, 300, and 350 feet from the center of construction activity.
Table 8. Typical Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment
Construction
Equipment
Noise Level
50 feet (dBA Lmax / Leq)
Noise Level
300 feet (dBA Lmax / Leq)
Noise Level
350 feet (dBA Lmax / Leq)
Bulldozer 81.7 / 77.7 66.1 / 62.1 64.8 / 60.8
Bulldozer 81.7 / 77.7 66.1 / 62.1 64.8 / 60.8
Front End Loader 79.1 / 75.1 63.5 / 59.6 62.2 / 58.2
Scraper 83.6 / 79.6 68.0 / 64.0 66.7 / 62.7
Total 83.6 / 83.8 68.0 / 68.3 66.7 / 66.9
RCNM results are included in Appendix D of the Rincon Consultants Noise Study (Attachment 8)
Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM); individual equipment noise levels based on FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact
Assessment Manual (2018).
Based on the RCNM results, maximum hourly noise levels during project construction, which would occur during
grading and foundation excavation, were calculated to be 67 dBA Leq at the mobile home park, which would exceed
the City’s construction noise standard of 65 dBA for multiple-family residential land uses. Construction activity
maximum hourly noise levels would attenuate to 68 dBA Leq at the commercial uses located to the south of the
project site, which would not exceed the City’s maximum hourly noise level limit of 70 dBA Leq for commercial
uses. Since the estimated noise levels during construction would exceed the applicable City noise standard for
multiple-family residential land uses, the temporary noise impact would be potentially significant. Additionally,
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 54
construction of future commercial uses on the eastern portion of the project site could result in noise impacts to the
Westmont Living facility, if the facility is operational at the initiation of construction. While the majority of grading
activities would have been completed with the mass grading proposed with this project, final grading, excavation,
and compaction activities would still be necessary. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would be required to reduce
construction noise levels at the nearby mobile home park and the on-site assisted living facility to comply with the
City’s standards.
Operational Noise
There are two primary sources of long-term operational noise associated with the project. The first would be from
on-site activity related to residential uses and any future commercial uses. The second primary source would be
increased traffic generated by the project. These issues are discussed below and fully analyzed in the Noise Study
included as Attachment 8.
The proposed residential project would require periodic trash hauling services. However, the project site is located
in a developed area and would be surrounded by multi-family residential and commercial uses that require similar
trash hauling services. Therefore, as trash trucks are already a common occurrence in the project vicinity, trash
services would not result in a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels above levels existing without the project.
The project would include outdoor patio space for the private use of residents, and it is assumed any future
commercial uses would have exterior patio area for dining or employee break areas. Operational noise associated
with outdoor use areas would generally be limited to conversations (normally about 70 dB),would be partially
shielded by the proposed buildings and would attenuate to approximately 48 dB at 12 feet. These noise-generating
activities would result in a negligible change to existing noise levels. Noise from conversation would also be an
intermittent and temporary noise source. Therefore, noise impacts related to outdoor seating areas would be less
than significant.
The project would include rooftop heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. Typically, HVAC
equipment is provided at a rate of 1-ton of nominal cooling/heating per 600 square feet. Various sizes of HVAC
units would be required to meet the needs of the different proposed uses. Based on the type of development and
density of development in the project area, it is anticipated the HVAC units would be roof mounted. The HVAC
would be approximately 3 feet above the roof level.
As shown in Table 8 below (Table 9 of the Rincon Noise Study), project operations would not generate noise levels
in excess of the City’s noise level limits. The Noise Study evaluated a conceptual commercial center which included
a grocery store and loading dock. Grocery stores are typically a more intensive noise use, requiring daily refrigerated
semi-truck deliveries at off hours of the morning or night. Additionally, noise levels generated by on-site noise levels
would not substantially increase ambient noise levels at the surrounding properties. Therefore, on-site noise sources
would result in less-than-significant noise impacts.
Table 8. Noise Levels from Project Operation
Location Noise Level at Receiver
dBA Leq
Noise Level
Limit (dBA)
Does the Project Exceed
Standard?
Hidden Hills Mobilodge 43 70* No
SESLOC 47 55 No
Marigold Shopping Center 45 65 No
Mindbody** 46 60 No
*The Hidden Hills Mobilodge site has been re-zoned since the time of the Rincon Noise Study. The zoning
designation has changed from R-2 to C-S, and therefore the noise level limit has changed from 50 dBA to 70 dBA.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 55
**The use on the site has changed since the time of the Rincon Noise Study from medical offices to Mindbody. The
noise level limit has not changed.
Traffic Noise Impacts
The proposed project would generate new vehicle trips and incrementally increase traffic on area roadways. A
project would result in a significant off-site traffic noise impact if it would cause the ambient noise level measured
at the property line of affected uses to increase by 3 CNEL to or within the “normally unacceptable” or “clearly
unacceptable” category as identified in Table 4 of the Noise Study (Attachment 8), or by 5 CNEL or more if existing
or future noise levels are below the normally actable category. Based on trip generation estimates, the project would
result in a maximum increase of 1,416 average daily trips (ADT) on local roadways. Existing traffic on Tank Farm
Road is approximately 20,709 ADT between Broad Street and Santa Fe Road. Existing traffic on Broad Street is
28,396 ADT between Tank Farm Road and Industrial Way and 22,944 between Tank Farm Road and Fuller Road.
Adding 1, 416 ADT to Tank Farm Road or Broad Street would result in less than 1 CNEL increase in traffic noise
levels along any affected roadway.
Based on the noise compatibility analysis, traffic volumes can be assumed to increase by 1 to 2 percent annually.
Broad Street and Tank Farm Road were assumed to increase by 1.5 percent annually. This would result in a 2040
ADT of 38,820 and 27,735 ADT for Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, respectively. Adding the project’s volumes
to these volumes would result in less than 1 CNEL increases along all affected roadways and noise generation from
the project would not be considered cumulatively considerable.
The project would increase existing traffic noise levels on Broad Street and Tank Farm Road by less than 1 CNEL.
Therefore, off-site traffic noise would not exceed the City’s thresholds and off-site traffic noise impacts would be
less than significant. In addition, the project was the subject of a noise and land use compatibility analysis prepared
by 45 dB (Attachment 7), which determined the project would be compatible with the existing and future noise
environment.
Therefore, the project would generate a potentially significant increase in ambient noise related to construction
activities that would require implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 to reduce potential impacts to be
less than significant. The project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels due to
operation of the project; therefore. operational impacts would be less than significant.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 would require use of construction equipment best management
practices, including shielding stationary equipment, temporary sound barriers between the construction site and the
mobile home park to the west and the on-site assisted-living facility, and limiting construction activity to daytime
hours when people are typically awake. Mitigation Measure N-2 would require nearby residential receptors to be
notified of future construction activities at the site. Acoustic shielding, sound blankets, and other construction noise
best management practices can reduce noise levels from individual pieces of construction equipment by 5-10 dBA.
Temporary sound barriers used to fully block line-of-sight noise transmission from the construction area to nearby
sensitive receivers can reduce noise from construction equipment by up to 10 dBA. Construction noticing and noise
complaint procedures ensure that nearby sensitive land uses would have the opportunity to alert the City’s
Community Development Department of construction noise issues. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation
Measures N-1 and N-2 would ensure that noise levels would not exceed the stationary equipment noise standards in
the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 9.12 (Noise Control).
b)Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with
short-term construction activities. A quantitative assessment of potential vibration impacts from construction
activities, such as blasting, pile-driving, vibratory compaction, demolition, drilling, or excavation, are conducted
using the equations developed by Caltrans and the FTA (Caltrans 2013b, FTA 2018). Certain types of construction
equipment can generate high levels of groundborne vibration. Table 9 shows typical vibration levels for various
pieces of construction equipment used in the assessment of construction vibration (FTA 2018).
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 56
Table 9. Typical Vibration Levels During Construction Activities
Equipment in/sec PPV at 25 ft. Approximate Lv Vdb at 25 ft.
Pile Driver Upper 1.518 112
Typical 0.644 104
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Table 10 shows estimated groundborne vibration levels from construction equipment that would result in the highest
vibration levels. Vibration impacts are assessed based on the distance from the location of vibration-intensive
construction activities, conservatively assumed to be at edge of the project site, to the edge of nearby structures.
Therefore, equipment was anticipated to operate at a distance of 250 feet from existing residences within the Hidden
Hills Mobilodge.
Table 10. Vibration Levels at Sensitive Receivers
Existing Residences
(250 feet)
Equipment in/sec PPV Vdb
Pile Driver Upper 0.121 90
Typical 0.052 82
Large bulldozer 0.007 65
Loaded trucks 0.006 61
Jackhammer 0.003 57
Threshold 0.5 94
Threshold Exceeded? No No
See Appendix D of the Rincon Consultants Noise Study (Attachment 8) for vibration analysis worksheet.
As shown, groundborne vibration from typical construction equipment is not estimated to exceed the threshold of
0.5 in/sec PPV at an existing residence. Similarly, typical construction equipment would not exceed the threshold
of 94 vdB at any occupied structure. The project does not include any substantial long-term vibration sources.
Therefore, the project would not expose local vibration sensitive receptors to excessive vibration levels and vibration
impacts would be less than significant.
c)The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project is located in the vicinity of the San
Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and is subject to the County Airport Land Use Plan and the City Airport Area
Specific Plan. As identified in the ALUP and in the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element, the project
site is outside the 60-dBA airport sound level contour, and within the 55-dBA airport sound level contour. Airport
noise levels at the project site are lower than existing road traffic noise levels; therefore, the project would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from aircraft noise. The 45db acoustics sound
study (Attachment 7) did not locate the project site within existing or projected noise contours for the airport that
would necessitate specific mitigation measures beyond standard Uniform Building Code and City Noise Ordinance
standards for temporary and on-going noise impact thresholds. According to the 45dB Acoustics report, use of
standard noise insulating building techniques for the Westmont Living facility south facing wall(s) would reduce
interior noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 57
The following measures would mitigate potential short-term construction noise impacts to a less-than-significant level.
N-1 Construction Equipment Best Management Practices. For all construction activity at the project site that exceeds 60
dBA at the property line with the mobile home park to the west, and for future construction activity associated with
development on the eastern portion of the project site that exceeds 60 dBA at the property line with the Westmont
Living facility, construction equipment 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 60 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).
•As needed, temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between the construction site and the mobile
home park to the west.
In the event the residential uses at the mobile home park site have been removed (i.e. the site is under construction),
and/or if the Westmont Living facility is not occupied or operational during future construction of the eastern portion
of the project site, then construction equipment noise attenuation techniques do not need to be implemented.
N-2 Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise Complaints. The contractor shall inform the
property owner and current tenants of the mobile home park to the west of the project site, prior to initiation of any
construction activities, of the proposed construction timelines and noise complaint procedures to minimize potential
annoyance related to construction noise. In the event the residential uses at the mobile home park site have been removed
(i.e. the site is under construction), notification is not required. If the Westmont Living facility is occupied or operational
prior to construction of future uses on the project site, the contractor shall inform the property owner and current tenants
of the facility of the 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
prior to issuance of grading permits or initiation of site disturbance activities. Signs identifying the noise complaint
procedures shall be in place before the beginning of and throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related
complaints shall be directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact with mitigation for short-term construction-related noise impacts.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 58
14.POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
a)Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
2, 6, 9,
35, 43 ☐☐☒☐
b)Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
1, 6, 9 ☐☐☐☒
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is the largest city in terms of population in San Luis Obispo County and has grown from 45,119 in
2010 to approximately 46,802 in 2019 according to the City General Plan 2019 Annual Report. The City’s housing tenure is
approximately 39% owner-occupied and 61% renter-occupied, which is strongly influenced by Cal Poly University and Cuesta
College enrollment. Many segments of the city’s population have difficulty finding affordable housing within the city due to
their economic, physical or sociological circumstances. San Luis Obispo contains the largest concentration of jobs in the County,
and during workdays, the City’s population increases to an estimated 70,000 persons.
The City’s Housing Element identifies various goals, policies, and programs based on an assessment of the City’s housing needs,
opportunities, and constraints. The City’s overarching goals for housing include safety, affordability, conservation of existing
housing, accommodation for mixed-income neighborhoods, providing housing variety and tenure, planning for new housing,
maintaining neighborhood quality, providing special needs housing, encouraging sustainable housing and neighborhood design,
maximization of affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in the City, and developing housing on suitable
sites.
a)The project site is already designated for commercial and mixed uses. The project site was already planned for uses
consistent with the Community Commercial Zoning and Special Focus Area designations adopted for the site with
the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element update. In addition, the site is surrounded by existing urban development
within the City and would not require new roadways or other infrastructure that might otherwise be considered
growth-inducing. Therefore, the impact of inducing substantial population growth to the planning area would be
less than significant.
b)The project site contains one vacant residence, which would be replaced as a result of the proposed project. The
project would not displace any existing residents since the existing residence is vacant. There would be no impact
with regard to population displacement, and a less-than-significant impact with respect to the displacement of
existing housing.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 59
15.PUBLIC SERVICES
a)Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 9, 12 ☐☐☒☐
Police protection? 9, 12 ☐☐☒☐
Schools? 9, 12 ☐☐☒☐
Parks? 12 ☐☐☒☐
Other public facilities? 12 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
The project site is located within the existing service area of the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department and would likely be
served by City Fire Station 3, located 1.7 miles north of the project site. Built in 1960, this fire station is the only station on the
east side of the Southern Pacific Railroad line and primarily provides response to the southern portion of the City. This station
is staffed by a 3-person paramedic truck company.
The City of San Luis Obispo Police Department (SLOPD) provides public safety services for the city and consists of 85.5
employees, 59 of which are sworn police officers. The SLOPD operates out of one main police station, which is located at 1042
Walnut Street at the intersection of Santa Rosa (Highway 1) and U.S. Highway 101. The project site is located within the San
Luis Coastal Unified School District, which includes 15 schools from elementary to high school. The nearest school to the
proposed project is Sinsheimer Elementary School, which is located 1.3 miles north of the project site. Public parks and
recreational trails within the city are managed and maintained by the City of San Luis Obispo Department of Parks and
Recreation. The nearest park to the project site is the Damon-Garcia Sports Complex directly north of the project site, and E.A.
French Park approximately a half mile east of the site.
All new residential and non-residential development within the City is subject to payment of Development Impact Fees, which
are administered by and paid through the Community Development Department. Development Impact Fees provide funding for
maintaining the City’s emergency services, infrastructure, and facilities. For example, fire protection impact fees provide funding
for projects such as the renovation of the City’s fire stations and the replacement of fire service vehicles and equipment.
a)Fire protection: The project site is within the existing service area of the SLOFD. The closest fire station to the
project site is City Fire Station 3, located at 1280 Laurel Lane, approximately two miles northeast of the project site.
The City has a mutual aid agreement with CALFIRE which allows for additional fire or emergency assistance when
needed, CALFIRE Fire Station 21 is located approximated 1 mile to the southeast. New development would be
subject to the SLOFD standards and California Fire Code in all proposed buildings, including installation of fire
hydrants, building sprinklers, provision of adequate water supply and pressure, placement of fire extinguishers,
provision of adequate fire access to buildings, and other requirements. The City’s Fire Master Plan (FMP) discusses
current and future operations and concludes that the City does not have enough primary neighborhood fire stations
to deliver suburban response times to all outer areas, including the AASP. Since the FMP’s preparation in 2009,
increasing population and new development have been further pressure on the department’s ability to respond to
requested services. The 2016 San Luis Obispo Fire Department Master Plan requires construction of a new fire
station in the southern area of the City when the southern area of the City reaches 90 percent buildout. The project
would be subject to development impact fees pursuant to City Council-adopted amendments and the Capital
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 60
Facilities Fee Program to pay for acquisition and construction of a new fire station in the southern area of the City.
The impact would be less than significant.
Police protection: The AASP and LUCE EIRs determined that implementation and buildout of the AASP would
not result in any significant impacts related to any of the above-listed services due to the ability to offset service
needs through the City’s Development Impact Fee program established via the City’s General Plan and/or
infrastructure requirements of project proponents as projects occur. Since the proposed development is consistent
with anticipated development in the Land Use Element as a Special Focus Area, development would not result in
any adverse impacts to these services. The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of, or need for new or physically altered, government facilities, the construction of
which, might have the potential to cause significant environmental impacts. The project would be subject to City-
established Development Impact Fees that are charged in conjunction with approval of development projects to
offset costs associated with increases in demand of public services. Thus, the impact would be less than significant.
Schools: The State has the authority to collect fees at the time of building permits to offset the costs to finance
school site acquisition and school construction, and said fees, when collected by local school districts, are deemed
by State law to provide adequate mitigation for school facility requirements. Section 65955 of the Government
Code prohibits the City from denying a subdivision or collecting any fees beyond those required by the school
district to mitigate effects associated with inadequate school facilities. Any increases in demand on school facilities
caused by the project are considered to be mitigated by the District’s collection of adopted fees at the time of
building permit issuance for each residence and commercial building. This impact would be less than significant.
Parks: The AASP and LUCE EIRs determined that implementation and buildout of the AASP would not result in
any significant impacts related to any of the above-listed services due to the ability to offset service needs through
the City’s Development Impact Fee program established via the City’s General Plan and/or infrastructure
requirements of project proponents as projects are developed. Since the proposed development is consistent with
anticipated development in the Land Use Element as a Special Focus area, development would not result in any
adverse impacts to these services. The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of, or need for new or physically altered, government facilities, the construction of which, might
have the potential to cause significant environmental impacts. The project would be subject to City-established
Development Impact Fees that would be collected in conjunction with approval of development projects to offset
costs associated with increases in demand of public services. Thus, the impact is less than significant.
Other public facilities: The project would result in a marginal increase in use of other City public facilities, such
as roadways and public libraries. The project would be subject to transportation development impact fees, which
would offset the project’s contribution to increased use of City roadways. Through participation in this fee program,
potential project impacts on schools would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
16.RECREATION
a)Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
35 ☐☐☒☐
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 61
b)Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
35 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
There are 26 parks in the City of San Luis Obispo, including eight community parks, ten neighborhood parks, and eight mini
parks. Collectively, these parks include approximately 152 acres of parkland, of which 34 acres are neighborhood parks. In
addition to parks, the City owns or manages approximately 7,000 acres of open space within and adjacent to San Luis Obispo.
This open space provides recreational opportunities such as fishing, hiking, and biking trails. Existing recreational facilities near
the project site include the Damon-Garcia Sports Complex directly north of the project site, and E.A. French Park approximately
a half mile east of the site. Damon-Garcia Sports Complex is a Community Park open space area available by reservation
containing soccer fields, picnic area, and a large open space. E.A. French Park is a neighborhood park with amenities/activities
such as an outdoor barbeque area, basketball court, picnic tables, tennis courts, playgrounds, and open space.
a)The project includes an assisted living facility which is considered a commercial land use. Accordingly, the project
would not be subject to payment of parkland in-lieu fees as required in 16.22.050 through 16.22.100 of the City
Municipal Code which are intended to offset potential demand that would arise through new residential
development. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in increased use of recreational facilities such that
there would be substantial physical deterioration or acceleration of recreational facilities. The impact would be less
than significant.
b)The project includes an assisted living facility which is considered a commercial land use. Accordingly, the project
is not subject to payment of parkland in-lieu fees as required in 16.22.050 through 16.22.100 of the City Municipal
Code which are intended to offset potential demand that would arise through new residential development. The
project does not include recreational facilities which could have a physical effect on the environment. The impact
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
17.TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
a)Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
2, 9, 10,
22, 35,
36, 41 ☐☒☐☐
b)Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?☐☐☒☐
c)Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
2, 9, 22,
32 ☐☐☒☐
d)Result in inadequate emergency access?4, 9 ☐☐☒☐
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 62
Evaluation
The City’s Circulation Element identifies current traffic levels and delays of public roadways and identifies transportation goals
and policies to guide development and express the community’s preferences for current and future conditions. Goals included in
the plan include, but are not limited to, maintaining accessibility and protecting the environment throughout San Luis Obispo
while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles, reducing use of cars by supporting and promoting
alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools, promotion of the safe operation of all modes of
transportation, and widening and extending streets only when there is a demonstrated need and when the projects would cause
no significant, long-term environmental problems.
Level of Service (LOS) is a term used to describe the operating conditions of an intersection or roadway based on factors such
as speed, travel time, queuing time, and safety. LOS designations range between A and F, with A representing the best operating
conditions and F representing the worst. The circulation element establishes the minimum acceptable LOS standard for vehicles
in the downtown area of the city as LOS E and states any degradation of the level of service below this standard shall be
determined significant under CEQA.
The City’s 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan outlines the City’s official policies for the design and development of bikeways
within the city and in adjoining territory under County jurisdiction but within the city’s Urban Reserve and includes specific
objectives for reducing vehicle use and promoting other modes. This plan identifies existing Class II bike path(s) within the
vicinity of project site along Marsh Street. Class II Bikeways are located along major streets and provide direct access to
important destinations.
In 2013, Senate Bill 743 was signed into law with the intent to “more appropriately balance the needs of congestion management
with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions” and required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new metrics for
identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. As a result, in December 2018, the California Natural Resources
Agency certified and adopted updates to the State CEQA Guidelines. The revisions included new requirements related to the
implementation of Senate Bill 743 and identified vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita, VMT per employee, and net VMT as
new metrics for transportation analysis under CEQA (as detailed in Section 15064.3 [b]). Beginning July 1, 2020, the newly
adopted VMT criteria for determining significance of transportation impacts must be implemented statewide.
The Mitigation Fee Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1600) is contained in California Government Code Section 66000 et. seq.
establishes constitutional limits and ground rules for the imposition and administration of impact fee programs. AB 1600 became
law in January 1988 and requires that local governments document the purposes of a fee, the use of fee revenues, and establish
a relationship between the use, need, and amount of the fee and the type of development paying the fee. In 2018 the City adopted
a comprehensive development impact fee program, including updated transportation and parks fees and new public safety fees.
The Citywide fee program was a key implementation action of the 2014 LUCE update and General Plan Policy 1.13.9 which
requires that new development pay its proportionate share of infrastructure cost. Projects included in the transportation impact
fee (TIF) program are implemented as needed either as City-initiated capital improvement projects or by private entities as a
mitigation requirement or as conditions of approval for private development projects. The timing of implementation depends on
when the deficiencies that the improvements address are projected to occur.
The project site would be accessed by Tank Farm Road and Broad Street. Broad Street is a north-south, two-way road. North of
its intersection with South Street and Santa Barbara Avenue, it is a 2-lane residential arterial street with a speed limit of 35 mph.
This section of road functions as a main connection between residential areas and the downtown core. South of the
Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersection, Broad Street is a 4-lane highway/regional route with a speed limit ranging from 40 mph
at the north end of the segment to 45 mph at the southern end. This segment serves as a main route to and from the southern
industrial and commercial centers to the downtown core and other regions. South of Rockview Place, Broad Street has a paved
sidewalk only on the east side of the street. Tank Farm Road an east-west, 2- lane arterial road with a speed limit of 45 mph in
the study area. Tank Farm Road serves a major connection from South Higuera Street to Broad Street, connecting residential
with commercial and industrial areas. West of Broad Street, Tank Farm Road has no sidewalks on the north side of the road, and
between Santa Fe Road and Old Windmill Lane has no sidewalks on either side.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 63
SLO Transit operates transit service in the City of San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA)
operates transit service throughout San Luis Obispo County and adjacent areas. SLO Transit Routes 1A and AB provide fixed-
route service to the study area. RTA offers Dial-A-Ride curb to curb services within the city limits. The nearest bus stops for
SLO Transit are located on Tank Farm 400 feet south of Broad Street in front of the Mindbody campus, and on the east side of
Broad Street in front of the Marigold Center; all bus stops along Broad Street north of Tank Farm are located on the east side of
Broad Street. The Downtown Transit Center, located approximately 2.7 miles from the project site near the intersection of Palm
Street and Osos Street, is served by most SLO Transit and SLORTA routes.
The applicant submitted a Multimodal Transportation Impact Study prepared by Central Coast Transportation Consulting, July
2020 (Attachment 9). This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts of the mixed-use project. Nine intersections were
evaluated during the weekday morning peak hour (7-9 AM) and weekday evening peak hour (4-6 PM) time periods under
Existing and Cumulative conditions with and without the project.
Thresholds of Significance
Significant impacts to transportation facilities are identified under the following circumstances:
For Unsignalized intersections, if Project traffic causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to unacceptable
traffic conditions of LOS E or F; and the volume-demand-to-capacity ratio (V/C), which compares roadway demand (vehicle
volumes) with roadway supply (roadway capacity), is increased by 0.01 or more and signal warrants are met; or the project
buildout causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity. For Signalized
Intersections if project traffic causes an intersection operating at an acceptable LOS D or better to degrade to unacceptable traffic
conditions, and the V/C ratio is increased by 0.01 or more; or the project buildout causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning
movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity.
For segments, if project traffic causes segment operation level of service degradation as follows:
•For bicycles, a segment operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to LOS E or F.
•For pedestrians, a segment operating at LOS A, B, or C to degrade to LOS D, E, or F.
•For vehicles, segments operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to LOS E or F and an increase of the V/C ratio by .01
or more.
•For transit service, a segment operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to LOS E or F; or a segment with a baseline
LOS E or F to degrade in a contextually significant way.
To facilitate potential future CEQA streamlining when a development project application is submitted for the eastern portion of
the project site, this section also analyzes the potential transportation impacts of the conceptual plan for the commercial center,
which includes a 45,000 square-foot medical office and 15,000 square-feet of retail/restaurant uses.
a) The proposed project, as well as all other development that occurs in the future pursuant to the AASP and the City’s
General Plan, would increase traffic in the area. The Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan identifies the
essential primary road system that would be needed to accommodate development within the Plan Area and
surrounding growth areas of the city. The LUCE Update EIR determined that the roadway plans of these planning
documents are for the most part self-mitigating in that 1) roadway alignments, road extensions, and new intersections
are designed and will be built in response to traffic projected at build-out and, 2) development projects in the AASP
areas will also contribute their fair share either through adopted city-wide Traffic Impact Fees, improvements to the
transportation network, assessments or dedications to specified roadway improvements, or a combination of one or
more of these measures. The proposed project would be consistent with these requirements, as mitigated, and would
be required to participate in its fair share of both on-site roadway improvements and fee payments for city-wide
traffic improvement projects in order to address project-specific and cumulative traffic impacts.
Site Access and On-Site Circulation
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 64
On-site circulation deficiencies would occur if project designs fail to meet appropriate standards, fail to provide
adequate truck access, or would result in hazardous conditions.
The Westmont Living facility and office/retail sites share access to Broad Street (via Industrial Way) and Tank
Farm Road (via Mindbody traffic signal). New limited access driveways are proposed on Broad Street (right-
in/right-out/left-in only) and Tank Farm Road (right-in/right-out only). The existing SESLOC driveway on Broad
Street would be removed and would share access with the new project driveway on Broad Street.
The project is expected to generate 1,416 daily trips, 98 AM peak hour trips, and 165 PM peak hour trips.
Existing + Project Intersection Operations: this scenario adds project-generated traffic to existing conditions
volumes. Note that this scenario includes both the proposed project and the 650 Tank Farm project (mobile home
park redevelopment), thereby slightly overstating project trips and associated impacts.
The following intersections operate below the LOS D threshold for vehicles:
•Tank Farm Road/Long Street: the side street approaches to this intersection operate unacceptably both
with and without the project during the PM peak hour. A traffic signal is in final design for this location
and is required as a condition of approval for a nearby project. Installation of a traffic signal would result
in acceptable operations; however, project traffic would contribute to degradation of the intersection until
the signal is installed.
•Tank Farm Road/Mindbody Traffic Signal: with the addition of the project, this intersection would operate
unacceptably during the PM peak hour. Project traffic would increase critical queues by at least one vehicle
length. Providing a second westbound through lane on Tank Farm Road consistent with the cross section
in the Airport Area Specific Plan would result in acceptable operations.
•Broad Street/Tank Farm Road Traffic Signal: The existing queue length for the eastbound left turn is near
its capacity and the addition of project traffic would increase the eastbound left-turn queue by one to two
vehicles. Most of the traffic added to this movement would come from the 650 Tank Farm parcel going
north on Broad Street. A vehicular connection between the 650 Tank Farm parcel and the project site
would allow 650 Tank Farm to use the traffic signal at Industrial Way, thereby avoiding the impacted
intersection, reducing the eastbound left-turn queue, and improving site circulation. Alternatively, the
eastbound left-turn queue at Broad Street/Tank Farm Road could be reduced to acceptable levels by
providing a second southbound left turn lane. This could require a slight widening of the southbound
approach of Broad Street.
No other new deficiencies were noted with the addition of project traffic to existing conditions.
Segment Operations
•Auto: The westbound segment of Tank Farm Road from Santa Fe Road to Broad Street operates at LOS F
during the PM peak hour because its volume to capacity ratio is greater than one, resulting in an automatic
LOS F. The addition of project traffic would not change the auto LOS score. No other new deficiencies
would occur with the addition of project traffic.
•Pedestrian: The northbound segment of Broad Street from Orcutt Road to Industrial Way operates at LOS
D during the PM peak hour both with and without the project due to the high vehicular volumes and
percentage of vehicles turning at the downstream intersection. The addition of project traffic would
increase the LOS score by less than two percent and increase vehicular volumes by less than five percent.
This would be an insignificant change that would not substantively worsen pedestrian conditions.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 65
•Bicycle: No new bicycle deficiencies would occur.
•Transit: Multiple study segments operate below the desired transit service level due to relatively infrequent
service or the lack of bus stops on a specific segment. The addition of project traffic would not overburden
or otherwise impact the transit network.
Cumulative + Project: this scenario represents future traffic conditions reflective of the buildout of land uses in the
area, including the proposed project.
The following intersections would operate below the LOS D threshold for vehicles:
•Tank Farm/South Higuera Street would operate at LOS F during the AM peak hour and at LOS E during
the PM peak hour. Queues would exceed storage length during at least one peak hour on the westbound
right, northbound right, and southbound left turning movements. Installing a second southbound left turn
lane would improve operations to LOS D for the movement and LOS C for the approach and address this
impact. This project is included in the City-wide impact fee program.
•Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road would operate at LOS F on the northbound approach. The northbound
right turn queue length would exceed storage length during the AM and PM peak hours. Installation of a
multi-lane roundabout is identified in the General Plan Circulation Element and the Airport Area Specific
Plan and would provide acceptable intersection operations. This project is included in the City-wide impact
fee program.
•Broad Street/Capitolio Way would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The westbound approach
would have a large delay due to the side street stop-controlled intersection and the high volume of traffic
along Broad Street. The planned future intersection of Prado Road/Broad Street would be signalized,
making signalization of the nearby Broad Street/Capitolio Way intersection undesirable. Capitolio Way is
connected to both Orcutt Road and Industrial Way by Sacramento Drive, thereby providing an alternative
access point for drivers seeking signalized access to Broad Street. No changes are recommended.
•Broad Street/Industrial Way would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour due to the presence of long
pedestrian crossing times across the north and south approaches. Without pedestrian actuation, the
intersection would operate acceptably at LOS D. The southbound left turn queue would exceed storage
length during the PM peak hour. Converting the east and west approaches from split phasing to permissive
phasing and restriping both approaches to provide dedicated left turn lanes and shared through/right turn
lanes would result in LOS C operations. This project is not included in the Citywide impact fee program,
therefore the project shall make a fair share contribution to these improvements.
•Broad Street/Tank Farm Road would operate at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours due to high
volumes from all approaches of the intersection. During at least one peak hour, queue would exceed storage
on the eastbound left, eastbound right, northbound left, and southbound right movements. Adding a second
southbound left turn lane (addressed in Existing + project impacts and mitigation), adding a dedicated
northbound right turn lane, and converting the westbound right turn lane to a shared through/right lane
would improve conditions. However, while some queue lengths would be decreased, others would be
increased. The City’s Circulation Element EIR recommends establishing time-of-day timing plans at this
intersection. These projects are included in the City-wide impact fee program.
The following intersections would operate below the LOS C threshold for pedestrians:
•Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road would operate at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours due to the
presence of side street stop- controlled intersections and high volumes and speeds along Tank Farm Road.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 66
Installation of a multi-lane roundabout is identified in the General Plan Circulation Element and the Airport
Area Specific Plan. This project is included in the City-wide impact fee program.
•Broad Street/Capitolio Way would operate at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours due to the presence
of side street stop- controlled intersections and high volumes and speeds along Broad Street. Pedestrians
seeking to cross Broad Street would use one of the nearby signalized intersections with dedicated
pedestrian phases.
•Broad Street/Aero Vista Lane would operate at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours due to the
presence of side street stop- controlled intersections and high volumes and speeds along Broad Street.
Pedestrians seeking to cross Broad Street would use one of the nearby signalized intersections with
dedicated pedestrian phases.
The following intersection would operate below the LOS D threshold for bicycles:
•Tank Farm Road/South Higuera Street would operate at LOS E in the westbound direction during the PM
peak hour. The addition of project traffic to would not degrade level of service in a contextually significant
way. Therefore, this is an insignificant impact.
Segment Operations
•Auto: The following segments would have a V/C ratio that is greater than one, resulting in an automatic
LOS F, even though the LOS scores are acceptable. The addition of project traffic would not change the
auto LOS, and the nearby intersections would constrain flow before the segments did, so the project would
have an insignificant effect on these segments.
o Southbound Broad Street from Orcutt Road to Industrial Way – AM and PM
o Northbound Broad Street from Orcutt Road to Industrial Way – PM
o Southbound Broad Street from Industrial Way to Tank Farm Road – AM and PM
o Northbound Broad Street from Industrial Way to Tank Farm Road – PM
o Northbound Broad Street from Aero Vista Lane to Tank Farm Road – AM and PM
o Southbound Broad Street from Aero Vista Lane to Aero Drive – AM and PM
o Northbound Broad Street from South City Limits to Aero Drive – AM and PM
o Westbound Tank Farm from Santa Fe to Broad – PM
In addition to analysis above, generalized LOS thresholds were also applied to calculate Auto LOS on the
segment of Tank Farm Road between Santa Fe Road and Old Windmill Lane to be consistent with the
methods applied in the 2014 Circulation Element Update. Peak hour volumes between 2,406 and 3,224
vehicles correspond to LOS E operations.
Under Cumulative conditions the PM peak hour volume along the study segment would be 2,418 vehicles
which corresponds to LOS E. The proposed project would add 15 vehicles, for a total of 2,433 vehicles
under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, also LOS E. The proposed project’s proportional share is 0.62
percent (15/2,433=.0062). The project shall make a fair share contribution of 0.62 percent of the cost of
widening Tank Farm Road to four lanes between Santa Fe Road and Old Windmill Lane.
•Pedestrian: Multiple segments do not have a pedestrian LOS reported due to the absence of pedestrian
facilities, or the presence of discontinuous pedestrian facilities. Several segments would operate
unacceptably at LOS D due to high vehicular volumes and speeds. No mitigations are recommended for
the segments with deficient pedestrian LOS scores. On each of these segments, the addition of project
traffic would increase the pedestrian LOS score by less than two percent and would increase vehicular
volumes by less than three percent. The addition of project traffic to would not degrade level of service in
a contextually significant way. Therefore, this is an insignificant impact.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 67
•Bicycle: No bicycle deficiencies would occur.
•Transit: Several segments operate below the transit LOS threshold due to infrequent service to the study
segments. Given the relatively low boardings on stops in the area, the addition of project traffic to would
not degrade level of service in a contextually significant way. Therefore, this is an insignificant impact.
In summary, the proposed project would add vehicular trips to streets that serve as entry/exit routes to the project
site. These streets with the given improvements specified in the City’s adopted planning documents would serve
to accommodate the added vehicular traffic.
As is reflected in the above discussion, with incorporation of mitigation measures noted below, which include
payment of fair share development impact fees and improvements to Tank Farm Road, impacts will be less than
significant with mitigation.
b)On June 16, 2020, San Luis Obispo City Council formally adopted the transition from level of service (LOS) to
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the primary metric for analysis of transportation impacts under CEQA. In turn, the
City established specific VMT impact thresholds and published an update to the City’s Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines (TISG), which documents performance thresholds and analysis methods consistent with current State
guidance. While VMT analysis was prepared for this development project, it should be noted that the findings of
this VMT analysis are presented for reference purposes only, as the CEQA review for this project was initiated prior
to the City’s adoption of VMT thresholds.
The project is located in an area of the City where residential VMT per capita is below the City’s impact threshold
of 14.25 per the TISG screening map. In addition, assisted living facilities generate fewer vehicle trips per resident
when compared to typical residential uses. Relatively few residents drive cars (the applicant estimates 25%) and
dining and social activities are provided on site, reducing the need for off-site travel. The assisted living component
of the project will have a less-than-significant impact to VMT. The 15,000 s.f. of retail uses will be split among
three buildings. The TISG note that local-serving retail development projects with less than 50,000 s.f. of gross floor
area can be assumed to cause a less-than significant impact to VMT. Accordingly, this project component will have
a less-than-significant impact to VMT. The cancer center portion of the project is a relatively unique use without
specified standards or thresholds. It would serve local patients who currently travel out of San Luis Obispo County
to receive treatment and would therefore shorten their trips. (CCTC 2020)
The project would help reduce VMT by providing an office building, residential uses, and retail/restaurant uses in a
location close to a regional shopping center and a mix of uses. Therefore, the project would reduce VMT by
improving the jobs/housing balance in the southern portion of the city of San Luis Obispo. Further, through
compliance with City Zoning Regulations requiring provision of secure bicycle storage, showers, and locker and
changing room facilities to encourage project employees to use alternative modes of transportation, as well as being
within immediate proximity of the Class II bicycle lane on Broad Street, the project would promote alternate modes
of travel that would reduce VMT. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the standards set forth in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b) and impacts would be less than significant.
c) The Westmont Living facility has been referred to the County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Commission
and was found to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. The Airport Area Specific Plan requires that the
project provide roadways that are designed and developed in accordance with adopted City standards, thereby
assuring predetermined standards necessary to limit safety hazards and provide adequate emergency access.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d)The Westmont Living facility has been referred to the County of San Luis Obispo Airport Land Use Commission
and was found to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. The Airport Area Specific Plan requires that the
project provide roadways that are designed and developed in accordance with adopted City standards, thereby
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 68
assuring predetermined standards necessary to limit safety hazards and provide adequate emergency access. Impacts
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
TR-1 Tank Farm Road from Broad through Project Site to Mindbody intersection. The applicant shall widen Tank Farm
Road along the project frontage to provide two westbound motor vehicle through lanes, bike lanes, landscaped parkway
and sidewalk. The ultimate street cross section shall be in substantial conformance with the typical cross section
identified for the parkway arterial designation in the Airport Area Specific Plan, with final geometric design elements
to be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
TR-2 Internal intersection with SESLOC property. The applicant shall install a single-lane roundabout at the internal site
intersection of the Mindbody Road extension adjacent to SESLOC on the north property line to encourage smooth
traffic flow between the sites. The City Transportation Department Division may approve an alternative intersection
control type, such as all-way stop control, if a roundabout is found to be geometrically infeasible at this location.
TR-3 Existing SESLOC driveway. The applicant shall remove the existing right-in/right-out driveway on Broad Street upon
completion of the new Broad Street driveway constructed as part of this project. The applicant shall ensure adequate
access is maintained to the SESLOC property during project construction.
TR-4 Tank Farm Road from Old Windmill Lane to Santa Fe Road. The project shall make a fair share contribution of
the cost of widening Tank Farm Road to four lanes between Santa Fe Road and Old Windmill Lane.
TR-5 Broad Street/Industrial Way. The project shall make fair share project contributions to convert the east and west
approaches from split phasing to permissive phasing and restriping both approaches to provide dedicated left turn lanes
and shared through/right turn lanes.
TR-6 Fair Share Contributions. The project applicant shall pay Citywide Traffic Impact Fees to satisfy fair share mitigation
obligations towards the following future transportation improvements:
•Tank Farm Road/Higuera Street: Installation of a second southbound left turn lane.
•Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road: Installation of a multi-lane roundabout.
•Broad Street/Tank Farm Road: Installation of a dedicated northbound right turn lane, addition of a second
southbound left turn lane, conversion of the westbound right turn lane to a shared through/right lane and establish
time-of-day timing plans.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 69
18.TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources
as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
12, 23 ☐☐☐☒
b)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
24, 26,
36 ☐☒☐☐
Evaluation
Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants (CCARC) conducted site visits, a records research, and outreach to local
tribal groups, as documented in their April 2018 Report. The results of their archival research, initial consultation with the
Chumash community, and an intensive archaeological survey of the Northwest Corner of Broad and Tank Farm Road
Archaeological Survey, identified no cultural resources. As a result, no further archaeological work was recommended within
the acreage investigated during this study. In the unlikely event that buried cultural materials are encountered during construction,
all ground disturbances will cease until a qualified archaeologist is contacted to evaluate the nature, integrity, and significance
of the deposit.
On August 13, 2018, local Native American tribal groups were formally noticed that an Initial Study was being completed for
the proposed project and invited to provide consultation on the proposed project. Notices regarding local tribal consultation
outreach per AB 52 have been provided to tribes that have requested to be on the City’s AB 52 consultation list. To date, one
reply has been made from a tribal representative requesting further clarification on the surface surveys conducted by the
applicant’s archaeology consultants. No concerns were noted regarding cultural resources concerns within the project area. No
additional comments have been received as of this date. Due to the amount of prior surface improvements and subsequent
demolition and rebuilding that has occurred on the project site since 1937, no surface indicators are anticipated at the site.
a)The project site does not contain any structures that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources or local register as defined in Public Resources Section 5020.1(k); therefore, no impacts to listed
or eligible historical resources would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b)The project site does not contain any known resources considered significant by any California Native American tribe.
As discussed in Section 5: Cultural Resources, Mitigation Measure CR-1 and CR-2 requires that construction activities
halt, the City Community Development Department be notified, and that appropriately mitigation be applied in the
event that any materials are encountered. In the event that human remains are unearthed and determined to be Native
American, the Most Likely Descendant would be notified. Therefore, with incorporation of the proposed mitigation
the project would have a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 70
Less than significant with mitigation.
19.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
7, 9, 16,
27, 33,
34, 37 ☐☐☒☐
b)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
7, 9, 16,
37 ☐☐☒☐
c)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
5, 7, 9,
16, 30,
31 ☐☐☒☐
d)Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
5, 8, 9 ☐☐☒☐
e)Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste?5, 8, 9 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
Water: As discussed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, the City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department provides potable and
recycled water to the community and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City is
the sole water provider within the city limits and most of the City’s water is supplied from multiple surface water sources.
However, the City also uses groundwater to supplement surface water supplies and recycled water is used to supplement
irrigation demand. With the update of the City’s General Plan Water and Wastewater Element in 2018, the City Council
reaffirmed the policy for a multi-source water supply. Consistent with the multi-source water supply concept, the City obtains
water from five sources:
•Salinas Reservoir (Santa Margarita Lake) and Whale Rock Reservoir: Combined Safe Annual Yield 4,910 AF/year
•Nacimiento Reservoir: 5,482 AF/year dependable yield/ contractual limit
•Recycled water from the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF): 238 AF/year
Wastewater: The wastewater system for the city includes facilities for wastewater collection and treatment. The City’s collection
system serves residential, commercial, and industrial customers. Sewer service is provided only to properties within the city
limits, with the exception of a few properties located just outside of the city limits, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and the County of
San Luis Obispo Airport. There are approximately 14,000 service connections.
The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) processes wastewater in accordance with the standards set by the State’s
RWQCB. The WRRF removes solids, reduces the amount of nutrients, and eliminates bacteria in the treated wastewater, which
is then discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek. The WRRF has a current operational capacity of 5.1 million gallons per day (MGD)
and is undergoing design for an average dry weather flow capacity of 5.4 million gallons per day (MGD) and a peak wet weather
flow capacity of 19 MGD upon completion of this upgrade. In 2017, annual average flows to the WRRF were approximately
3.30 MGD.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 71
Solid Waste: The City’s Utilities Department is responsible for administering an exclusive franchise agreement with San Luis
Garbage Company to collect and dispose solid waste generated by residential, commercial, and industrial customers in San Luis
Obispo. This agreement also includes curbside recycling, and green waste service. There are three solid waste disposal facilities
within San Luis Obispo County. Most solid waste collected in the city is disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill. Cold Canyon
Landfill is currently (2016) permitted to receive up to 1,650 tons of solid waste per day, with an estimated remaining capacity of
14,500,000 cubic yards (60.1 percent remaining capacity). In 2015, the Cold Canyon Landfill operator estimated the landfill is
expected to reach capacity in 2040.
a)The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on City infrastructure, including water,
wastewater and storm water facilities. Annual water demand is estimated at 24.45-acre feet/year based on the
Westmont Living facility and the conceptual commercial center. Daily wastewater generation is estimated to be
21,820 gallons per day. Development of the site is required to be served by City sewer and domestic and recycled
water service, which have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Existing storm water facilities are present
in the vicinity of the project site, and it is not anticipated the proposed project would result in the need for new
facilities or expansion of existing facilities which could have significant environmental effects. This project has
been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource or infrastructure deficiencies have been identified;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b)The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on water supplies, as anticipated under the
recent General Plan Update. As analyzed in the LUCE Update EIR, the City has sufficient water supplies for build-
out of the City’s General Plan. The incremental change created by the proposed project would be less than
significant. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource or infrastructure
deficiencies have been identified; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c)The developer would be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public
sewer on Tank Farm Road. The on-site sewer facilities would be required to be constructed according to the
standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code and City standards. Impact fees would be collected at the time building
permits are issued to pay for wastewater collection infrastructure and capacity at the City’s Water Resource
Recovery Facility (WRRF). The fees would be set at a level intended to offset the potential impacts of the project.
This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource or infrastructure deficiencies
have been identified; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d)Based on the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the Westmont Living
facility and conceptual commercial center would result in the generation of approximately 4,315.5 pounds of solid
waste per day (see Table 11 below).
Table 11. Estimated Project Solid Waste Generation
Use Generation Rate Project Pounds Solid Waste
Per Day
Commercial R–tail -
Restaurant
0.005 lb//sf/day 15,000 sf 3,780
Professional Office 0.084 lb/sf/day 45,000 sf 270
Nursing Home 5.00 lb/person/day 50 units 265.5
Total 4,315.5
Project demolition and other construction solid waste materials would likely be disposed of at the Cold Canyon
Landfill. The Cold Canyon Landfill has approximately 14,500,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity as of January
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 72
of 2015 and is expected to reach capacity in 2040. San Luis Garbage Company would serve the proposed
development and has approved the project’s garbage and recycling plan. Therefore, potential impacts would be less
than significant.
e)The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires each city and county in California to reduce the
flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. The proposed project is required to reduce the
waste stream generated by development consistent with the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element policies
to coordinate waste reduction and recycling efforts (COSE 5.5.3), and Development Standards for Solid Waste
Services (available at http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4384 ). A solid waste reduction plan for
recycling discarded construction materials is a submittal requirement with the building permit application. The
incremental additional waste stream generated by this project is not anticipated to create significant impacts to solid
waste disposal. This impact would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant impact.
20.WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a)Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?56 ☐☐☒☐
b)Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
10, 14 ☐☐☒☐
c)Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
n/a ☐☐☒☐
d)Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
4, 5, 9,
17 ☐☐☒☐
Evaluation
The project site is located in an urban area within the city of San Luis Obispo. Urban fire hazards result from the materials, size,
and spacing of buildings, and from the materials, equipment, and activities they contain. Additional factors are access, available
water volume and pressure, and response time for fire fighters. Based on the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the risk of
wildland fires is greatest near the City limits where development meets rural areas of combustible vegetation. Most of the
community is within one mile of a designated High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, which indicates significant risk to
wildland fire.
The City Safety Element identifies four policies to address the potential hazards associated with wildfire, included approving
development only when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available, classification of Wildland fire hazard
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 73
severity zones as prescribed by CAL FIRE, prohibition of new subdivisions located within “Very High” wildland fire hazard
severity zones, and continuation of enhancement of fire safety and construction codes for buildings.
a)Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a significant temporary or permanent impact on any
adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. No breaks in utility service would occur as a
result of project implementation. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
b)The project is located within a developed site in an urban area in the City of San Luis Obispo. The project would
not substantially change the existing topography of the project site. Based on the City’s Municipal Code, the project
site is located within the Commercial Fire Zone and is, therefore, required to construct all interior walls, floors,
ceilings, and partitions with 5/8 “Type X” gypsum wallboard or install an automatic fire sprinkler system throughout
the building to increase the structure’s overall fire resistance. A Fire Sprinkler Pre-Design Evaluation was conducted
for the project by Alpha Fire Unlimited and provided recommended design components for the proposed automatic
fire sprinkler system. The project would be required to meet all applicable standards for fire prevention within the
California Building Code and California Fire Code. The project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire; therefore, potential
impacts would be less than significant.
c)The project would include the installation of new water, emergency water, wastewater, stormwater, and natural gas
infrastructure and connections to City infrastructure. These proposed infrastructure components would occur within
existing developed land and would be required to be installed in full compliance with applicable CBC and California
Fire Code regulations; therefore, potential impacts associated with exacerbation of fire risk from installation of new
infrastructure would be less than significant.
d)The project site is generally flat and would not be located near a hillslope or in an area subject to downstream
flooding or landslides. The project does not include any design elements that would expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None necessary.
Conclusion
Less than significant.
21.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a)Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
☐☒☐☐
Without mitigation, the project could have the potential to have adverse impacts on all of the issue areas identified herein. As
discussed above, potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise, and transportation/traffic would
be less than significant with incorporation of recommended mitigation measures.
Issues, Discussion and Supporting Information Sources
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-
1486-2018, SPEC-1482-2018, EID-1484-2018 Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 74
b)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
☐☒☐☐
The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and not considered “cumulatively considerable.” The proposed
project would be consistent with the Land Use Element, Zoning, and Special Focus Area designation for the site. Cumulative
impacts of developing this site were analyzed as a part of the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) EIR. Although
incremental changes in certain issue areas can be expected as a result of the proposed project, all environmental impacts that
could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through compliance with existing
regulations and incorporation of required mitigation measures as discussed in this Initial Study.
c)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?☐☒☐☐
Implementation of the proposed project would result in no environmental effects that would cause substantial direct or indirect
adverse effects on human beings. All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced
to a less-than-significant level through compliance with existing regulations and incorporation of required mitigation measures
as discussed in this Initial Study.
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-1486-2018, SPEC-1492-2018, EID-1484-2018
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 75
22.EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should
identify the following items:
a)Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Airport Area Specific Plan (2014), City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update EIR, available
for review at the City Community Development Department (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401), or at the following
web site:
http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan
b)Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Applicable excerpts, analysis and conclusions from the AASP and LUCE Update EIR have been added to each impact issue
area discussion. Where project specific impacts and mitigation measures have been identified that are not addressed in these
EIRs, original analysis has been provided and mitigation has been recommended to reduce impact levels as needed.
c)Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions of the project.
N/A
23.SOURCE REFERENCES
1.City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use Element, December 2014, and Final EIR, October 2014.
2. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element, December 2014, and Final EIR, October 2014
3. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise Element, May 1996
4. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element, March 2012.
5. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element, 2006.
6. City of SLO General Plan Housing Element, January 2015
7. City of SLO General Plan Water and Wastewater Element, March 2018
8. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities Department
9. City of SLO General Plan EIR 2014 for Update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements
10. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (which includes the City Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17)
11. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010
12. City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database
13. City of SLO Climate Action Plan, August 2012
14. 2019 California Building Code
15. City of SLO Waterways Management Plan
16. Water Resources Status Report, July 2012, on file within the Utilities Department
17. Beacon Geotechnical Engineering Analyses (for Commercial and Assisted Living) each dated February 9, 2018
18. Staff Knowledge
19. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency:
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FMMP/
20. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, April 2012
21. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County, Air Pollution Control District, 2001
22. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, on file in the Community
Development Department
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-1486-2018, SPEC-1492-2018, EID-1484-2018
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 76
23.City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development
Department
24. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community
Development Department
25. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Map
26. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Map
27. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan
28. Website of the California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List:
https://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/
29. Project Plans
30. 2012 Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring and Inflow/Infiltration Study
31. 2016 Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy
32. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations, March 2015
33. City of SLO Climate Action Plan, August 2012
34. Final Potable Water Distribution System Operations Master Plan, December 2015
35. Airport Area Specific Plan Updated 2014
36. Central Coast Archeological Research Consultants Report, April 2018
37. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, June 14, 2016
38. Oasis Creek Setback Exhibit L-1, 10-3-2017
39. Sage Institute Biological and Wetland Resources Assessment, 3-16-2018
40. 45dB Acoustics Residential & Commercial Projects Acoustical Assessment, 10-31-2017
41. Central Coast Transportation Consulting, Multimodal Transportation Impact Study, 2-2018
42. CAP Compliance Checklist
43. Airport Land Use Commission Findings and Conditions of Consistency Staff Report 9-19-2018
44. Technical Noise Analysis Report, Rincon Consultants, June 2019
45. SLOACPD. 2016. 2015 Annual Air Quality Report. September 2016. Available at:
http://www.slocleanair.org/images/cms/upload/files/2015aqrt-FINAL.pdf
46. SLOAPCD Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1YAKjBzVkwi1bZ4rQ1p6b2OMyvIM&ll=35.364986805363735%2
C-120.52563349999997&z=9
47. San Luis Obispo Heritage Trees Map, 2019. Available at:
<http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Solutions/s2.html?appid=74e2e5bf9e534eaabf95b0917da8bbc7>.
48. California Department of Conservation Fault Activity Map of California, 2010. Available at:
<https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/>.
49. NRCS Web Soil Survey, 2019. Available at: <https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>.
50. Geologic Map of the Pismo Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California, 2004. Available at: <
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_78101.htm>.
51. Areas of Land Subsidence in California, USGS. Available at: <https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-
subsidence-areas.html>.
52. Paleontological Resource Assessment for the California Flats Solar Project, Monterey and San Luis Obispo
Counties, California, 2013. Available at: <https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=48222>.
53. City of San Luis Obispo Website Community Choice Energy. Available at:
<https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/city-administration/sustainability/community-choice-
energy>.
54. SWIS Facility Detail Cold Canyon Landfill, Inc., California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery,
Accessed September 16th, 2019. Available at: <https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/40-AA-
0004/Detail/>.
55. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates, California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery
(CalRecycle), accessed November 2019. Available at:
<https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates>.
56. Diablo Canyon Emergency Planning Zone Map, accessed November 2019. Available at:
<https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1203/ML120380327.pdf>.
Note: All documents listed above are available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, 919 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California (805) 781-7101.
Northwest Corner Mixed-Use (NKT): SBDV-1483-2018, ARCH-1486-2018, SPEC-1492-2018, EID-1484-2018
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2019 77
Attachments
1.General Plan, Rezone, and Specific Plan exhibit and associated proposed text amendments
2.Project plans (Includes Assisted Living Center, Conceptual Commercial Center (future entitlements required), Public
Improvement Plans, and Vesting Tentative Tract #3115)
3.Biological Wetland Resource Assessment, Sage Institute Inc., August 28, 2014, updated March 16, 2018
4.a) Rincon Consultants, Inc. Air Quality Technical Memorandum, February 26,19
b)Updated CalEEMod Emissions Modeling, SWCA, July 29, 2020
5.ALUC consistency determination, September 19, 2018
6.Rincon Consultants, Technical Memorandum (GHG analysis), April 1, 2019
7.45 db Acoustical Assessment, October 31, 2017
8.Rincon Consultants, Inc. Technical Noise Analysis Report, June 2019
9.Multi-Modal Transportation Impact Study, July 2020
Applicant Acceptance of Mitigation Measures
Project: Northwest Corner Mixed-Use Commercial/Assisted Living Center
including Vesting Tentative Tract Map 315
EID-1484-2018 (3985 Broad Street and 660 Tank Farm Road)
This agreement is entered into by and between the City of San Luis Obispo and NKT
Development, LLC and Westmont Development, LP on the 6th day of August, 2020.
The following measures are included in the project to mitigate potential adverse
environmental impacts. Please sign the original and return it to the Community
Development Department.
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Air Quality
AQ-1 Standard Control Measures for Construction Equipment
The following standard air quality mitigation measures shall be implemented
during the site preparation and grading phases of construction 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 CARB-
certified motor vehicle diesel fuel nontaxed version suitable for use off-
road);
•Comply with the State Off-Road Regulation;
•Use on-road heavy-duty trucks that meet the CARB’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;
•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;
•Diesel idling within 500 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be not
permitted;7
•Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 500 feet of sensitive
receptors;6
•Equipment shall be electrified when feasible;
•Gasoline-powered equipment shall be substituted in place of diesel-
powered equipment, where feasible; and
•Alternatively-fueled construction equipment shall be used on-site where
feasible, such as compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, propane or
biodiesel.
AQ-2 Best Available Control Technology. Diesel construction equipment used during
the site preparation and grading phases shall be equipped with CARB Tier 3 or
Tier 4 certified off-road engines and 2010 on-road compliant engines.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be noted on project grading and building
plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department.
Compliance shall be verified during construction by the City during regular inspections, in
coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as
necessary.
AQ-3 The project would result in ROG and NOx operational emissions that exceed the
SLOAPCD threshold of 25 lbs/day. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the
applicant shall identify at least 8 mitigation measures from Table 3-5 of the
SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook to incorporate into the project. Prior to
occupancy, final inspection, or establishment of the use, whichever occurs first, the
project shall demonstrate that it has implements such measures. If the project
obtains a GreenPoint rating or is LEED certified, the applicant shall only need to
implement 6 mitigation measures from Table 3-5 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Air
Quality Handbook.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be noted on project grading and building
plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department.
Compliance shall be verified prior to occupancy or final inspection by the City, in
coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as
necessary.
AQ-4 This project is greater than 4 acres and within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors
(residential units). Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could
be a nuisance to residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed
construction site. Projects with grading areas that are greater than 4-acres or are
within 1,000 feet of any sensitive receptor shall implement the following measures
to manage fugitive dust emissions such that they do not exceed the APCD’s 20%
opacity limit (APCD Rule 401) or prompt nuisance violations (APCD Rule 402):
a.Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible;
b.Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of
20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased
watering frequency would be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15
mph. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
When drought conditions exist and water use is a concern, the contractor
or builder should consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant
where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. Please
refer to the following link from the San Joaquin Valley Air District for a list
of potential dust suppressants: Products Available for Controlling Dust;
c.All dirt stock pile areas should be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or
other dust barriers as needed;
d.Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans should be implemented as soon as
possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities;
e.Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater
than one month after initial grading should be sown with a fast
germinating, non-invasive grass seed and watered until vegetation is
established;
f.All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation should be stabilized
using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods
approved in advance by the APCD;
g.All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed
as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as
possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
h.Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site;
i.All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered
or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical
distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114;
j.“Track-Out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates
on the exterior surfaces of motor vehicles and/or equipment (including
tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in CVC
Section 23113 and California Water Code 13304. To prevent ‘track out’,
designate access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and
others to use them. Install and operate a ‘track-out prevention device’
where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The
‘trackout prevention device’ can be any device or combination of devices
that are effective at preventing track out, located at the point of intersection
of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices
need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate
tracked out soils, the trackout prevention device may need to be modified;
k.Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water
where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when
feasible;
l.All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and
building plans; and
m.The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose
responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust emissions do not result in a
nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures
as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions
below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any
60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods
when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be
generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such
persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the
start of any grading, earthwork or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at 805-
781-5912).
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be noted on project grading and building
plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department.
Compliance shall be verified during construction by the City during regular inspections, in
coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as
necessary.
AQ-5 The applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation
of the property including sampling and testing for naturally occurring asbestos in
full compliance with California Air Resources Board Air Toxics Control Measure
(ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations
(93105) and SLOAPCD requirements. This geologic evaluation shall be submitted
to the City Community Development Department upon completion. If the geologic
evaluation determines that the project would not have the potential to disturb
asbestos containing materials (ACM), the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM
exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
Monitoring Program: This applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a
geologic evaluation of the property including sampling and testing for naturally occurring
asbestos prior to issuance of grading permits or prior to any site disturbance or grading
activities. Compliance shall be verified during construction by the City during regular
inspections, in coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control
District, as necessary.
AQ-6 If asbestos containing materials (ACM) are determined to be present onsite,
proposed earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in
full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding ACM, including
the ARB Asbestos Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (93105) and requirements stipulated in
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61, Subpart
M – Asbestos; NESHAP). These requirements include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1.Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities
commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2.Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and,
3.Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and
requirements for identified ACM.
Monitoring Program: If asbestos containing materials (ACM) are determined to be
present onsite, this measure shall be noted on project grading and building plans for
review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall
be verified during construction by the City during regular inspections, in coordination with
the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as necessary.
AQ-7 The applicant shall implement the following measures to reduce the risk associated
with disturbance of ACM and lead-coated materials that may be present within the
existing structure onsite:
a.Demolition of the on-site structure shall comply with the procedures required
by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR
61, Subpart M – Asbestos) for the control of asbestos emissions during
demolition activities. SLOAPCD is the delegated authority by the U.S. EPA
to implement the Federal Asbestos NESHAP. Prior to demolition of on-site
structures, SLOAPCD shall be notified, per NESHAP requirements. The
project applicant shall submit proof that SLOAPCD has been notified prior
to demolition activities to the City Community Development Department.
b.If during the demolition of the existing structure, paint is separated from the
construction materials (e.g., chemically or physically), the paint waste shall
be evaluated independently from the building material by a qualified
hazardous materials inspector to determine its proper management. All
hazardous materials shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with
local, state, and federal regulations. According to the Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC), if the paint is not removed from the building
material during demolition (and is not chipping or peeling), the material can
be disposed of as non-hazardous construction debris. The landfill operator
shall be contacted prior to disposal of lead-based paint materials. If
required, all lead work plans shall be submitted to SLOAPCD at least 10
days prior to the start of demolition. The applicant shall submit proof that
paint waste has been evaluated by a qualified hazardous waste materials
inspector and handled according to their recommendation to the City
Community Development Department.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be noted on project grading and building plans
for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance
shall be verified during construction by the City during regular inspections, in coordination
with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1. Vegetation Removal Timing. Vegetation removal and initial site disturbance for
any project elements shall be conducted between September 1st and January 31st
outside of the nesting season for birds. If vegetation removal is planned for the
nesting bird season (February 1st to August 31st), then preconstruction nesting bird
surveys shall be required within one week prior to construction activities to
determine if any active nests would be impacted by project construction. If no
active nests are found, and vegetation removal is conducted within 5 days of the
survey and is done continuously, then no further survey work shall be required.
Additional surveys during the nesting season shall be conducted as needed if there
is any break in vegetation removal, grading and/or construction lasting more than
5 days. If any active nests are found that would be impacted by vegetation removal,
grading and/or construction, then the nest sites shall be avoided with the
establishment of a non-disturbance buffer zone around active nests as determined
by a qualified biologist. Nest sites shall be avoided and protected within the non-
disturbance buffer zone until the young are no longer reliant on the nest site for
survival (have fledged) as determined by a qualified biologist. All workers shall
receive training on good housekeeping practices during construction that will
discourage nests from being established within the work area (e.g., cover stored
pipe ends, cover all equipment being used daily, etc.) A qualified biologist shall
regularly walk the construction area to look for nest starts and review site for good
housekeeping practices. As such, avoiding disturbance or take of an active nest
would reduce potential impacts on nesting birds to a less-than-significant level.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be noted on all grading and construction
plans. In the event vegetation removal and site disturbance are planning for the bird
nesting season, the applicant shall provide evidence that a qualified biologist has been
retained to complete nesting bird surveys, prior to any site disturbance or grading. The
preconstruction surveys shall occur within one week prior to construction activities. A
report shall be submitted by the biologist to the City Community Development Department
and Natural Resources Manager within 48 hours of completion of surveys. In the event
that active nests are found, no work shall commence in the nest buffer zone until the
qualified biologist has provided clearance to commence work. Such clearance shall be
provided to the City Community Development Department and Natural Resources
Manager within 24 hours of such determination. The City Community Development
Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
BIO-2. Clean Water Act Permitting. The applicant shall obtain Clean Water Act (CWA)
regulatory compliance in the form of a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) or written documentation from the Corps that no permit would
be required for the proposed road crossing. Should a permit be required, the
applicant shall implement all the terms and conditions of the permit to the
satisfaction of the Corps. Corps permits and authorizations require applicants to
demonstrate that the proposed project has been designed and will be implemented
in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts on aquatic resources to the extent
practicable. Compliance with Corps permitting would also include obtaining and
CWA 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB). In addition, the Corps and RWQCB may require compensatory
mitigation for unavoidable permanent impacts on waters of the U.S./State to
achieve the goal of a no net loss of wetland values and functions. As such, with
implementation of the 3:1 ratio of creek enhancement mitigation plantings and
regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the U.S. to a
less than significant level.
Monitoring Program: The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Corps prior to
issuance of grading or construction permits, or prior to any site disturbance or grading
activities.
BIO-3. Streambed Alteration Agreement. The applicant shall obtain compliance with
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (Streambed Alteration
Agreements) in the form of a completed Streambed Alteration Agreement or
written documentation from the CDFW that no agreement would be required for
the proposed road crossing. Should an agreement be required, the property
owners shall implement all the terms and conditions of the agreement to the
satisfaction of the CDFW. The CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement process
encourages applicants to demonstrate that the proposed project has been
designed and will be implemented in a manner that avoids and minimizes impacts
in the stream zone. In addition, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation for
unavoidable permanent impacts on waters of the State. As such, with
implementation of the 3:1 ratio of creek enhancement mitigation plantings and
regulatory compliance would reduce potential impacts on waters of the U.S. to a
less than significant level.
Monitoring Program: The applicant shall provide evidence of compliance prior to
issuance of grading or construction permits, or prior to any site disturbance or grading
activities. The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources
Manager shall verify compliance.
BIO-4. Wetland Replacement and Riparian Enhancement Plan. The applicant shall
retain a qualified biologist to prepare a wetland replacement and riparian
enhancement plan. The plan shall provide for a minimum of 3:1 mitigation area for
the wetland area to be impacted and shall be designed to the satisfaction of the
Corps, RWQCB, and CDFW. The plantings for the riparian enhancement area
shall include native species and shall be placed in a manner to ensure their
success. The plan shall include a cost estimate for the implementation of the
plantings. The applicant shall implement the wetland replacement and riparian
enhancement plan within 60 days of completion of grading and site disturbance
activities.
Monitoring Program: The applicant shall submit the plan prior to issuance of grading or
construction permits, or prior to any site disturbance or grading activities. The plan shall
be implemented within 60 days of completion of grading and site disturbance activities.
The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall
verify compliance.
BIO-5. Wetland Replacement and Riparian Enhancement Plan Monitoring. The
applicant shall retain a qualified biologist or landscape architect for the purpose of
monitoring the success of the mitigation planting area. The monitoring contract
shall include a requirement that the monitor conduct, at a minimum, an annual site
visit and assessment of the planting success for 10 years and an annual submittal
of a monitoring report to the City Community Development Department and Natural
Resources Manager. The applicant shall also post a bond for the cost of
implementing the mitigation planting. If the monitoring demonstrates that the plan
has been successfully implemented, the bond shall be returned. If the monitoring
demonstrates that the plan has not been successfully implemented, the applicant
shall submit a revised plan for review and approval. If the revised plan successfully
implemented after two years, the City Community Development Department and
Natural Resources Manager shall use the bond to hire a licensed landscape
architect to implement and maintain the revised plan.
Monitoring Program: The applicant shall provide evidence that a qualified biologist or
landscape architect has been retained for the purpose of monitoring the mitigation
planting area, and bond shall be posted, prior to issuance of grading or construction
permits, or prior to any site disturbance or grading activities. The City Community
Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Halt Work Order for Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural
Resources. In the event that historical or archaeological remains are discovered
during earth disturbing activities associated with the project, construction activities
shall cease, and the City Community Development Department shall be notified so
that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified
specialist (paleontologist, historian, archaeologist) and disposition of artifacts may
be accomplished in accordance with state and federal law. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. A Native American tribal
representative shall monitor any mitigation excavation associated with Native
American materials.
CR-2. Halt Work Order for Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human
remains are unearthed, the applicant shall notify the City Community
Development Department and shall comply with State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5, which requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the
County of San Luis Obispo Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County
Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are
determined to be Native American, the County Coroner will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which will determine and notify
a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the
site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and
nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native
American burials.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on all grading and construction
plans. The City Community Development Department shall verify compliance, including
preparation and implementation of the Monitoring Plan, and review and approval of
cultural resources monitoring reports documenting compliance with required mitigation
measures.
Greenhouse Gasses
GHG-1 Monterey Bay Community Power. Prior to final inspection, occupancy, or
establishment of the use, the applicant shall demonstrate that the subject use has
made an operational commitment to participate in Monterey Bay Community
Power. Any rental or lease agreement for individual tenant spaces shall include a
requirement that the tenant continue participation in Monterey Bay Community
Power. This participation shall continue until PG&E or another electric provider
provides 100 percent carbon-free electricity, at which point the applicant or tenant
may elect to switch services to such a provider.
Monitoring Program: Compliance shall be verified by the City prior to final inspection
or occupancy.
Noise
N-1 Construction Equipment Best Management Practices. For all construction
activity at the project site that exceeds 60 dBA at the property line with the mobile
home park to the west, and for future construction activity associated with
development on the eastern portion of the project site that exceeds 60 dBA at the
property line with the Westmont Living facility, construction equipment 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 60
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).
•As needed, temporary sound barriers shall be constructed between the
construction site and the mobile home park to the west.
In the event the residential uses at the mobile home park site have been removed
(i.e. the site is under construction), and/or if the Westmont Living facility is not
occupied or operational during future construction of the eastern portion of the
project site, then construction equipment noise attenuation techniques do not need
to be implemented.
N-2 Neighboring Property Owner Notification and Construction Noise
Complaints. The contractor shall inform the property owner and current tenants
of the mobile home park to the west of the project site, prior to initiation of any
construction activities, of the proposed construction timelines and noise complaint
procedures to minimize potential annoyance related to construction noise. In the
event the residential uses at the mobile home park site have been removed (i.e.
the site is under construction), notification is not required. If the Westmont Living
facility is occupied or operational prior to construction of future uses on the project
site, the contractor shall inform the property owner and current tenants of the
facility of the 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 prior to
issuance of grading permits or initiation of site disturbance. Signs identifying the
noise complaint procedures shall be in place before the beginning of and
throughout grading and construction activities. Noise-related complaints shall be
directed to the City’s Community Development Department.
Monitoring Program: Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes,
and construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and shall be submitted to the City
for approval prior to grading and building permit issuance for each project phase. BMPs
shall be identified and described for submittal to the City for review and approval prior to
building or grading permit issuance. BMPs shall be adhered to for the duration of the
project. The applicant shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at
construction site entries. Signs shall be posted prior to commencement of construction
and maintained throughout construction. Schedule and neighboring property owner
notification mailing list shall be submitted 10 days prior to initiation of any earth movement.
The Community Development Department shall confirm that construction noise reduction
measures are incorporated in plans prior to approval of grading/building permit issuance.
All construction workers shall be briefed at a pre-construction meeting on construction
hour limitations and how, why, and where BMP measures are to be implemented. A
workday schedule will be adhered to for the duration of construction for all phases.
City staff shall ensure compliance throughout all construction phases. Building inspectors
and permit compliance staff shall periodically inspect the site for compliance with activity
schedules and respond to complaints.
Transportation
TR-1 Tank Farm Road from Broad through Project Site to Mindbody intersection.
The applicant shall widen Tank Farm Road along the project frontage to provide
two westbound motor vehicle through lanes, bike lanes, landscaped parkway and
sidewalk. The ultimate street cross section shall be in substantial conformance
with the typical cross section identified for the parkway arterial designation in the
Airport Area Specific Plan, with final geometric design elements to be approved to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
Monitoring Program: This improvement shall be incorporated into project improvement
plans for review and approval by the City Community Development and Public Works
Departments. The improvement shall be installed prior to occupancy/final inspection or
establishment of any use on the site. Compliance shall be verified by the City Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to approval of grading plans and prior
to issuance of occupancy certificate or approval of final inspections.
TR-2 Internal intersection with SESLOC property. The applicant shall install a single-
lane roundabout at the internal site intersection of the Mindbody Road extension
adjacent to SESLOC on the north property line to encourage smooth traffic flow
between the sites. The City Transportation Department Division may approve an
alternative intersection control type, such as all-way stop control, if a roundabout
is found to be geometrically infeasible at this location.
TR-3 Existing SESLOC driveway. The applicant shall remove the existing right-in/right-
out driveway on Broad Street upon completion of the new Broad Street driveway
constructed as part of this project. The applicant shall ensure adequate access is
maintained to the SESLOC property during project construction.
Monitoring Program: This improvement shall be incorporated into project improvement
plans for review and approval by the City Community Development and Public Works
Departments. The improvement shall be installed prior to occupancy/final inspection or
establishment of any use on the site. Compliance shall be verified by the City Community
Development and Public Works Departments prior to approval of grading plans and prior
to issuance of occupancy certificate or approval of final inspections.
TR-4 Tank Farm Road from Old Windmill Lane to Santa Fe Road. The project shall
make a fair share contribution of the cost of widening Tank Farm Road to four
lanes between Santa Fe Road and Old Windmill Lane.
TR-5 Broad Street/Industrial Way. The project shall make fair share project
contributions to convert the east and west approaches from split phasing to
permissive phasing and restriping both approaches to provide dedicated left turn
lanes and shared through/right turn lanes.
TR-6 Fair Share Contributions. The project applicant shall pay Citywide Traffic Impact
Fees to satisfy fair share mitigation obligations towards the following future
transportation improvements:
•Tank Farm Road/Higuera Street: Installation of a second southbound left turn
lane.
•Tank Farm Road/Santa Fe Road: Installation of a multi-lane roundabout.
•Broad Street/Tank Farm Road: Installation of a dedicated northbound right turn
lane, addition of a second southbound left turn lane, conversion of the
westbound right turn lane to a shared through/right lane and establish time-of-
day timing plans.
Monitoring Program: The applicant shall pay their fair-share contribution for
improvements to the intersections prior to issuance of construction permits for any
structure. Compliance shall be verified by the City Community Development Department
prior to issuance of any construction permits.
If the Community Development Director or hearing body determines that the above
mitigation measures are ineffective or physically infeasible, they may add, delete or
modify the mitigation to meet the intent of the original measures.
Please note that section 15070 (b) (1) of the California Administrative Code requires the
applicant to agree to the above mitigation measures before the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration is released for public review.
This project will not be scheduled for public review and hearing until this signed
original is returned to the Community Development Department.
________________________________
Tyler Corey Date
Principal Planner
_______________________________
Carol Florence Date
authorized agent for
NKT Development, LLC
Westmont Development, LP
08/06/2020 06 August 2020
Attachment 1
General Plan, Rezone, and Specific Plan
exhibit and associated text amendment
Specific Plan: BP-SP to CC-SP-SF
General Plan: Business Park to Community Commercial
Zoning: BP-SP to CC-SF
Specific Plan: BP-SP to CC-SP-SF
3985 Broad St
660
Tank
Farm
Rd
TANK
F
A
R
M BROADμ0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Feet
*3$PHQGPHQW5=63$
7DQN)DUP5RDGDQG %URDG6WUHHW $WWDFKPHQW
****
Airport Area Specific Plan Amendments
(SPEC-1482-2018)
NWC Broad Street and Tank Farm Road Mixed-use
a commercial center & assisted living facility
3985 Broad Street & 660 Tank Farm Road, San Luis Obispo, CA
053-421-003, 053-421-004
20 July 2018; rev. 06 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
I.INTRODUCTION
The Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site is identified as a special focus area in the General Plan within
the Airport Area Specific Plan (“AASP”). It is unique, and the only location in the AASP with this
particular designation and zoning. Therefore, the proposed amendment utilizes the “Special Areas”
section of the AASP Land Use chapter to identify and describe the special focus area; it’s relationship
to the General Plan and Specific Plan, and key development standards.
Pursuant to the submitted applications for the Mixed-Use development at 3985 Broad Street and 660
Tank Farm Road, the following excerpts from the Airport Area Specific Plan Chapter 4.0- Land Use
include the proposed text amendments. Inserted text is bold, blue and underlined. Deleted text is bold,
red with strikethrough (strikethrough).
II.AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN CHAPTER 4.0 LAND USE
LAND USE PROGRAM [Amend Table 4.1]
Table 4.1
San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan
Land Use Program and Development Capacities
Residential Land Use Acres Units
Per Acre
Estimated
Dwelling
Units
Undeveloped Land1
Low Density 12.8 7.9 101
Medium Density 20.5 10.9 223
Medium-
High/High
Density
15.2 21.2 322
Subtotal 55.3 720
Developed Land (Existing
Mobile Homes)
6.7 4.8 32
Total Residential
Property
55.2 678
Non-Residential Land
Use Designations
Acres Floor Area Ratio Estimated Building
Square Feet
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
2 of 7
Undeveloped Land
Neighborhood
Commercial
8.4 0.31 115,000
Community
Commercial
9.66 0.44 185,147
Business Park 126.6 116.94 0.21 1,102,939 1,018,781
Service
Commercial
155 0.24 1,620,432
Manufacturing 101.3 0.17 747,642
Subtotal 384.4 3,586,013 3,687,002
Developed Land 145.2 0.28 1,786,745
Total Non-Residential
Property
529.6 5,372,758 5,437,474
Other Land Use
Designations
Acres
Agriculture 76.1
Conservation/Open
Space/Parks
294.9
Government 292.5
Total Other Property 663.5
Total AASP Acreage2 1255.1
1 The total potential square footage (and associated acreage) includes future
development on properties currently under pre-annexation agreements and properties
outside of the City’s jurisdiction with alternative fee programs. Since these properties
may not be required to pay their fair share of infrastructure costs, the difference will
need to be funded by other funding sources (e.g., grants, additional City contributions,
etc.).
2 Excludes acreage associated with roads, setbacks, creeks, and other features.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN [Amend Table 4.2]
Community Commercial
(Special Focus Area #12)
Community Commercial
(Special Focus)
CC-SF
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
3 of 7
SPECIAL AREAS [Insert text at end of section]
BROAD STREET AT TANK FARM ROAD SITE
The Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site is identified in the General Plan Land Use Element
and Map as a Special Focus Area #121, and is further iterated by a zoning designation of
Community Commercial with Special Focus Overlay (C-C-SF).2
Development of this site shall be consistent with the General Plan description “Located at the
northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10 acre site will be
used as a mixed use site, providing for a mix of uses as described under the Community
Commercial and Office designations. The site will provide a strong commercial presence at
the intersection. Areas along the creek on the western edge of the site will be appropriately
buffered to provide creek protections. Attention to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle
and pedestrian circulation will be especially important in the development of this corner.”
Source: 2014 General Plan Land Use Element- (8.13) Special Focus Area.
The intent of the Office zone is to provide for offices and related functions close to medical
facilities and the downtown, convenient to public transportation and related government and
business services. The Office zone is also intended to provide for the continuation and
development of residential uses where they will be compatible with neighboring offices. The
Community Commercial zone is intended to provide for a wide range of retail sales and
personal services within the context of distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers that
serve customers and clients from all over the City.
The development plans and project description for this mixed-use area includes:
•A retail shopping center and/or office uses consistent with the Community Commercial
and Office zones at the northwest corner of the Tank Farm Road and Broad Street
intersection, and a residential assisted living facility located on the western portion of the
property.
•North-south road connection from the signalized intersection of Tank Farm Road and
Mindbody driveway to the drive aisle on SESLOC property to the north, that ultimately
connects to Industrial Way.
•Enhancement of the creek and riparian habitat areas. Limited encroachment into the
creek setback area may be necessary for the north-south road connection.
•The development shall comply with the following development standards
Standard C-C-SF Standard
Maximum Density Pursuant to Airport Land Use Plan
Minimum Yards (Setbacks)
Building to Broad and Tank Farm
street frontage
Parking lots to Broad and Tank
Farm street frontage
15 feet
10 feet
1 See Land Use Element Map (December 2014) http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5857
2 See Zoning Map (January 2015) http://gis.slocity.org/Documents/ZoningMap2015.pdf
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
4 of 7
Parking lots to interior property
lines and adjacent parcels
Building to interior property lines
and adjacent parcels
None
None
Maximum Height 35 feet
Maximum coverage 75 percent
Maximum floor area ratio 2.0
Standard Lot Dimensions See Tentative Tract Map 3115
Minimum Parking Requirements
Assisted Living
Bank and Credit Union
Office
Medical Office
Retail Sales and Personal Service
Restaurant
Uses not listed
Accessible, Clean Air, Motorcycle, Bike
parking
1 space per every 5 beds (plus 1 space per
2 employees on shift
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 500 SF
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 100 SF of total restaurant
area (including any food preparation/
service area)
See Zoning Regulation requirements
See Zoning Regulation requirements
III.“CLEAN” TEXT
The following duplication of the proposed text amendment is provided in a “clean” format for review
reference and formatting purposes.
LAND USE PROGRAM
Table 4.1
San Luis Obispo Airport Area Specific Plan
Land Use Program and Development Capacities
Residential Land Use Acres Units
Per Acre
Estimated
Dwelling
Units
Undeveloped Land1
Low Density 12.8 7.9 101
Medium Density 20.5 10.9 223
Medium-
High/High
Density
15.2 21.2 322
Subtotal 55.3 720
Developed Land (Existing
Mobile Homes)
6.7 4.8 32
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
5 of 7
Total Residential
Property
55.2 678
Non-Residential Land
Use Designations
Acres Floor Area Ratio Estimated Building
Square Feet
Undeveloped Land
Neighborhood
Commercial
8.4 0.31 115,000
Community
Commercial
9.66 0.44 185,147
Business Park 116.94 0.21 1,018,781
Service
Commercial
155 0.24 1,620,432
Manufacturing 101.3 0.17 747,642
Subtotal 384.4 3,687,002
Developed Land 145.2 0.28 1,786,745
Total Non-Residential
Property
529.6 5,437,474
Other Land Use
Designations
Acres
Agriculture 76.1
Conservation/Open
Space/Parks
294.9
Government 292.5
Total Other Property 663.5
Total AASP Acreage2 1255.1
1 The total potential square footage (and associated acreage) includes future
development on properties currently under pre-annexation agreements and properties
outside of the City’s jurisdiction with alternative fee programs. Since these properties
may not be required to pay their fair share of infrastructure costs, the difference will
need to be funded by other funding sources (e.g., grants, additional City contributions,
etc.).
2 Excludes acreage associated with roads, setbacks, creeks, and other features.
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
6 of 7
RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN
Community Commercial
(Special Focus Area #12)
Community Commercial
(Special Focus)
CC-SF
SPECIAL AREAS
BROAD STREET AT TANK FARM ROAD SITE
The Broad Street at Tank Farm Road Site is identified in the General Plan Land Use Element and Map
as a Special Focus Area #123, and is further iterated by a zoning designation of Community
Commercial with Special Focus Overlay (C-C-SF).4
Development of this site shall be consistent with the General Plan description “Located at the
northwest corner of Broad Street and Tank Farm Road, this approximate 10-acre site will be used as a
mixed use site, providing for a mix of uses as described under the Community Commercial and Office
designations. The site will provide a strong commercial presence at the intersection. Areas along the
creek on the western edge of the site will be appropriately buffered to provide creek protections.
Attention to connectivity, safety and comfort of bicycle and pedestrian circulation will be especially
important in the development of this corner.” Source: 2014 General Plan Land Use Element- (8.13)
Special Focus Area.
The intent of the Office zone is to provide for offices and related functions close to medical facilities
and the downtown, convenient to public transportation and related government and business
services. The Office zone is also intended to provide for the continuation and development of
residential uses where they will be compatible with neighboring offices. The Community Commercial
zone is intended to provide for a wide range of retail sales and personal services within the context of
distinctive, pedestrian-oriented shopping centers that serve customers and clients from all over the
City.
3 See Land Use Element Map (December 2014) http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5857
4 See Zoning Map (January 2015) http://gis.slocity.org/Documents/ZoningMap2015.pdf
Airport Area Specific Plan Text Amendment SPEC-1482-2018
Oasis Associates, Inc. 20 July 2018; rev. 04 February 2020; rev. 29 July 2020
7 of 7
The development plans and project description for this mixed-use area includes:
•A retail shopping center and/or office uses consistent with the Community Commercial and
Office zones at the northwest corner of the Tank Farm Road and Broad Street intersection, and
a residential assisted living facility located on the western portion of the property.
•North-south road connection from the signalized intersection of Tank Farm Road and
Mindbody driveway to the drive aisle on SESLOC property to the north, that ultimately
connects to Industrial Way.
•Enhancement of the creek and riparian habitat areas. Limited encroachment into the creek
setback area may be necessary for the north-south road connection.
•The development shall comply with the following development standards
Standard C-C-SF Standard
Maximum Density Pursuant to Airport Land Use Plan
Minimum Yards (Setbacks)
Building to Broad and Tank Farm street
frontage
Parking lots to Broad and Tank Farm
street frontage
Parking lots to interior property lines and
adjacent parcels
Building to interior property lines and
adjacent parcels
15 feet
10 feet
None
None
Maximum Height 35 feet
Maximum coverage 75 percent
Maximum floor area ratio 2.0
Standard Lot Dimensions See Tentative Tract Map 3115
Minimum Parking Requirements
Assisted Living
Bank and Credit Union
Office
Medical Office
Retail Sales and Personal Service
Restaurant
Uses not listed
Accessible, Clean Air, Motorcycle, Bike parking
1 space per every 5 beds (plus 1 space per 2
employees on shift1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 500 SF
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 300 SF
1 space per 100 SF of total restaurant area
(including any food preparation/ service area)
See Zoning Regulation requirements
See Zoning Regulation requirements
Attachment 2
Project Plans
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3115
BROAD STREETTANK FARM ROAD
2
A
2
C2B
2D·
Preliminary Grading Plans
(Commercial buildings shown for conceptual purposes only)
EVSTATIONAMBULATORY
CLEANAIRVEHICLECLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.03/16/18DATE:PROJECT TITLE:
WESTMONT ASSISTED LIVING
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
SHEET TITLE:C-1WSHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:A.G.DRAWN BY:A.G.CHECKED BY:L.S.APPROVED BY:SCALE:1"=20'PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.03/16/18DATE:PROJECT TITLE:
WESTMONT ASSISTED LIVING
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN/ SECTIONS AND DETAILS
SHEET TITLE:SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:A.G.DRAWN BY:A.G.CHECKED BY:L.S.APPROVED BY:SCALE:1"=20'PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATIONC-2W
EVSTATIONVANACCESSIBLEEVSTATIONSTANDARDACCESSIBLEEVSTATIONSTANDARDACCESSIBLECITY SPECIFICATION NO.
02/14/20
DATE:PROJECT TITLE:NWC COMMERCIAL CENTER PRELIMINARY GRADING PLANSHEET TITLE:C-1
SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
A.G.
DRAWN BY:
A.G.
CHECKED BY:
L.S.
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
1"=30'
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.
02/14/20
DATE:PROJECT TITLE:PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN/ SECTIONS AND DETAILSSHEET TITLE:SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
A.G.
DRAWN BY:
A.G.
CHECKED BY:
L.S.
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATIONNWC COMMERCIAL CENTER C-2
EVSTATIONVANACCESSIBLEEVSTATIONSTANDARDACCESSIBLEEVSTATIONSTANDARDACCESSIBLECITY SPECIFICATION NO.
02/14/20
DATE:PROJECT TITLE:PRELIMINARY COMPOSITE UTILITY PLANSHEET TITLE:SHEET NO.
DESIGNED BY:
A.G.
DRAWN BY:
A.G.
CHECKED BY:
L.S.
APPROVED BY:
SCALE:
1"=30'
PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATIONNWC COMMERCIAL CENTER C-3
Westmont Assisted Living Facility Plans
WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/28/2018 6:25 PM melanie plot:11/29/2018 11:13 AM melanie ryan file:\\lenitynas\projects\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\prelim\a0.0 cover sheet.dwg A0.0c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIACOVER SHEETA0.0
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE FACILITY
PROJECT DATA
LENITY ARCHITECTURE
3150 KETTLE CT. SE
SALEM, OR 97301
PHONE: (503) 399-1090
FAX: (503) 399-0565
Contact: Aaron Clark
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/
ARCHITECT:
SITE ADDRESS:
PROPOSED USE:
APPLICANT:
CIVIL ENGINEER:
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:BRIAN LIND, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT /
LENITY ARCHITECTURE
3150 KETTLE CT. SE
SALEM, OR 97301
PHONE: (503) 399-1090
FAX: (503) 399-0565
Contact: Brian Lind
WESTMONT DEVELOPMENT, LP
7660 FAY AVENUE, SUITE N
LA JOLLA, CA 92037
PHONE: (415) 317-9969
Contact: Michael O'Rourke
Andy Plant
660 & 670 TANK FARM ROAD
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
TAX LOT# 053-421-004
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY
TYPE CONSTRUCTION: 5A
OCCUPANCY: R2.1
BETHEL ENGINEERING
2624 AIRPORT DRIVE
SANTA MARIA, CA 93455
PHONE: (805) 934-5767
Contact: Russ Garrison
DRAWING INDEX CONTINUED
BUILDING ELEVATIONSA6.3
L2 COURTYARD LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
A1.1
A1.7
LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT PLANL1
E1.1 SITE LIGHTING PLAN
A3.1
SITE PLAN
A0.0
SITE DETAILS
1ST FLOOR PLAN
COVER SHEET
2ND FLOOR PLANA3.2
A6.0 BUILDING SECTIONS
ELECTRICAL
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURAL
1 OF 9 RENDERING 1
RENDERINGS
2 OF 9
3 OF 9
4 OF 9
RENDERING 2
RENDERING 3
RENDERING 4
A5.1 COLOR BOARD
5 OF 9 RENDERING 5
6 OF 9 RENDERING 6
7 OF 9 RENDERING 7
8 OF 9 RENDERING 8
9 OF 9 RENDERING 9
A5.2 IMAGE REFERENCE
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT
LOCATION
TANK FARM RD.SANTA FEBROAD ST.S. HIGUERA ST.U.S. HIGHWAY 101VIEW AT ENTRY
OWNER:NKT DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
684 HIGUERA ST., SUITE B
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
PHONE: (805) 541-9004
FAX: (805) 544-0394
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:BEACON GEOTECHNICAL, INC
P.O. BOX 4814
PASO ROBLES, CA 93447
PHONE: (805) 239-9457
Contact: Greg McKay
MICHAEL O'ROURKE
ANDREW PLANT
TIM DAVIES
JAY NICCUM
OWNER SD PHASE
APPROVAL SIGNATURES:
DATE
DATE
DATE
DATE
MEMORY
CARE WITH
ASSISTED
LIVING
ABOVE
SERVICE /
DELIVERIES
CONNECTION
TO RETAIL
PROJECT
SIGN EMPLOYEE PARKINGASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
ASSISTED
LIVING
ASSISTED
LIVING
COVEREDENTRYPUBLIC
ART
ACCESSROADASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
MEMORY
CARE
COURTYARD
ENTRYWAYPROPOSEDPROPERTY LINEWALKWALKT O P O F B A N K
35' S E T B A C K F R O M
T O P O F B A N K
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
SHORT TERM
BIKE PARKING,
(6) SPACES
LONG TERM BIKE
PARKING, (5) SPACES,
(WEATHERPROOF
LOCKERS)
PROPOSED
TRANSFORMER
LOCATION AND
FUTURE
GENERATOR
6'
18'59'-9"25' x 12'
LOADING
ZONE
16' 16'-338" 24'9'18'
7
6'
56'-8"
26'
NOTE:
DEMO EXISTING
DWELLING AND
ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES
c
PROJECT SCOPE
ASSOCIATED WITH
THIS APPLICATION
FACILITY
VAN
SEE TRACT MAP 3115
FOR PROPOSED
PROPERTY LINES
FLAG
POLE
ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT SHOWN FORREFERENCE ONLYFLOOR AREA: 6,188 SF
ROOF ACCESS 52 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 6,240 SF
FLOOR AREA: 4,932 SF
ROOF ACCESS 50 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 4,982 SF
FLOOR AREA: 4,785 SF
ROOF ACCESS 50 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 4,835 SF
FLOOR AREA: 3,152 SF
ROOF ACCESS 53 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 3,205 SF
FLOOR AREA: 7,973 SF
ROOF ACCESS 53 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 8,026 SF LOADING ONLY / NO PARKINGLOADING ONLY / NO PARKINGLOADING ONLY / NO PARKING
LOADING ONLY / NO PARKINGN O P A R K I N G N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N G N O P A R K I N GEVSTATIONEVSTATIONAMBULATORYEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEV
STATION
VAN
ACCESSIBLE
EVSTATIONEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEVSTATIONEV
STATION
STANDARD
ACCESSIBLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLE CLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLEGAS SERVICE
ELECTRICAL SERVICE
6" FIRE LINE
1 1/2" DOMESTIC WATER
TELEPHONE SERVICE
EV
EV
SCORED CONC.
SCORED CONC.
SCORED
CONC.
SCORED
CONC.
SCORED
CONC.WALKCONNECTION TO
RETAIL
CONNECTION TO
RETAIL
WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/28/2018 6:27 PM melanie plot:11/28/2018 6:29 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\arch\a1.1 site plan.dwg Layout1c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA250 50 100 150
SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 50'
DATE: 11/29/2018
SITE DATA:
PROPERTY AREA:3.80 ACRES 165,914 SQ. FT.
PARKING BREAKDOWN:
OPEN SPACES:
EMPLOYEE SPACES:
ACCESSIBLE SPACES:
TOTAL SPACES:
LONG TERM BIKE PARKING:
SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING:
TOTAL SPACES:
PROJECT DATA
58
10
4
72
CURBS/PATIOS / WALKS:
DRIVES / PARKING:
OPEN SPACE:
TOTAL
PROPOSED
SITE AREA BREAKDOWN:
BUILDING COVERAGE:
IMPERVIOUS AREA:
PERVIOUS AREA:
FIRST FLOOR:
SECOND FLOOR:
TOTAL:
67,374 SQ.FT.
66,281 SQ.FT.
133,655 SQ.FT
BUILDING:
28 BED MEMORY CARE
111 UNIT ASSISTED LIVING
5
6
11
67,374 SQ.FT.
22,104 SQ.FT.
46,978 SQ.FT.
29,458 SQ.FT.
165,914 SQ.FT.
(40.6%)
(13.3%)
(28.3%)
(17.8%)
(100%)
136,456 SQ.FT.
29,458 SQ.FT.
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
TANK FARM RD.SANTA FEBROAD ST.S. HIGUERA ST.U.S. HIGHWAY 101SITE
SITE PLANA1.1
1
8'-0"
9'-01
2"
STONE VENEER TO
MATCH BUILDING.
FINISH GRADE
3"x3" SQ. METAL LEGS W/
BASE ATTACHMENTS
SIGN FONT, COLOR AND LOGO
PER SIGN COMPANY AND
OWNER
3" DEEP FABRICATED
ALUMINUM CABINET
SCALE:
PROJECT SIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/SIGN/PROJ SIGN
CONTROL JOINT
COLD JOINT
EXPANSION JOINT
EXP. JOINT W/ CAULK AT
30'-0" OC (MAX) OR AT
INTERSECTION OF ANY
STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS
ROUGH BROOM FINISH (TYP)
SMOOTH FINISH
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
SCORE AT 5'-0" OC
SIDEWALKS, 10'-0"
OC PATIO AREAS
4" CONC WALK (TYP)
ROUGH BROOM FIN
SMOOTH FINISH
SCALE:
WALK/PATIO DETAIL
(CONCRETE WALK JOINTS)
1 1/2" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02520004
4"
3
8"
4"
1
2"
SCALE:
PARKING LOT LIGHT BASE
3/4" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02850001
20 FT. #4 CU "U.F.E.R." GROUND
COILED UNDER BASE
3/4" PVC CONDUIT, BURY 24" OR
AS REQ. BY AUTHORITY HAVING
JURISDICTION. SEE PLANS
NOTES:
·COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL SPECIFICATIONS, SEE
STRUCTURAL FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
·PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS TO ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL
·MIN. 24" CLEAR BETWEEN POLE BASE AND BACK OF CURB
EXPOSED CONCRETE TO HAVE
RUBBED FINISH, SURFACES -
TOP AND SIDES
2 PIECE BASE
COVER
CONFIRM BOLT SIZE, PATTERN,
HEIGHTS & CONDUIT
REQUIREMENTS W/ POST BASE
SHOP DRAWINGS
FINISHED
GRADE
GROUND LUG
INSIDE POLE
FIXTURE POLE
RADIUS
TROWLED BULL
NOSED EDGE
24"
@ CURB
ONLY
24"
SCALE:
PARKING SIGN
(CALIFORNIA)
NOT TO SCALE P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02840007
SHALL BE LOCATED ON A POST AT THE FRONT OF EACH PARKING SPACE. THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN
SHOULD BE A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET FROM THE GROUND. IF THE PARKING SPACE IS HEADED
INTO A BUILDING THE SIGN MAY BE FASTENED TO THE SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
A STANDARD R7-8 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SHALL BE USED TO MARK EACH PARKING SPACE.
MINIMUM SIGN SIZE SHALL BE 12"x18". ALL SIGNS MUST BE PERMANENTLY MOUNTED IN THE GROUND
OR ON A WALL.
UNAUTHORIZED
VEHICLES PARKED IN
DESIGNATED
HANDICAPPED SPACES
NOT DISPLAYING
DISTINGUISHING
PLACARDS OR LICENSE
PLATES ISSUED FOR
PHYSICALLY DISABLED
PERSONS MAY BE TOWED
AWAY AT OWNERS
EXPENSE.
TOWED VEHICLES MAY BE
RECLAIMED AT _______
OR BY TELEPHONING
_______.
1" MIN. HT. LETTERS
12"
R99 (CA)R100B (CA)
WHITE
BLUE
NOTES:
ONLY
$250 FINE
PARKING
NOTES:
HANDICAP SIGNAGE DETAIL
SCALE:
HANDICAP SIGN DETAIL
CALIFORNIA
NOT TO SCALE P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02840006CAL
1'-0"x1'-6"x.080 ALUMINUM HANDICAPPED
PARKING SIGN. BOLT TO STEEL TUBE
WITH 2-1/8" 316 STAINLESS STEEL
BOLTS, NUTS AND WASHERS. SEE
DETAIL 10/A1.8.
$250 FINE SIGN
VAN-ACCESSIBLE SIGN
2"x2"x.188 STEEL TUBE EXTENDED
INTO CONCRETE FILLED PIPE 2'-0".
PROVIDE WELDED WATERTIGHT CAP.
PAINT P&L #6118 BLACK COFFEE
PAINT PIPE BASE
YELLOW
PAVEMENT/SIDEWALK
CONCRETE
1. HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGN SHALL CONFORM WITH CURRENT
STATE AND LOCAL AND FEDERAL CODES AND REGULATIONS.
2. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND 120 M.P.H. WINDLOAD.
1. WHEN HEADER CURB IS USED IN LIEU OF WHEEL STOPS, SIDEWALK ABUTTING CURB
MUST BE WIDENED BY 18" SO THAT THE TOTAL SIDEWALK WIDTH IS 62", ALLOWING
FOR 44" MINIMUM CLEAR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE.
2. FOR COMPLETE DETAIL OF HANDICAPPED SIGN, REFER TO DETAIL.
HANDICAP SPACE STRIPING DETAIL
R7-8b (CA)
R99b (CA)
R99 (CA)
VAN ACCESSIBLE
1-1/2"R
SCALE:
VAN ACCESSIBLE
(PARKING SIGN)
NOT TO SCALE P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02840004
12" (18")
FOUNDATION PER MANUFACTURES
RECOMMENDATIONS (MAY VARY W/
SOILS AND WIND CONDITIONS)
FIBERGLASS OR
ALUMINUM TAPERED
FLAGPOLE
SCALE:
FLAG POLE
(GROUND SET CONE)
NOT TO SCALE P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/10350001
3
-
MOUNTING PLATES PER
MANUFACTURER
5" DIA. x 35'-0" MAX. FLAG POLE
AND A-BOLTS BY
MANUFACTURER
24" DIA.
CENTER UNDER
FLAG POLE
2"
CLR.
(3) #3 TIES WITHIN TOP 5" OF
FOOTING
F.G.
(4) #4 EVENLY SPACED AROUND
SIDES OF FOOTING
#3 TIES AT 12" o.c.
F' = 2500 psi
F' = 60,000 psi (#4 BARS)
c
y
F' = 40,000 psi (#3 BARS)y
4'-0" x 8'-0" FLAG MAX.
SCALE:
FLAG POLE
(FOOTING DETAIL)
NOT TO SCALE P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/FLAGPOLE-FOOTING DETAIL
FLAG POLE FOOTING PER
MANUFACTURER
RECOMMENDATIONS,
COORDINATE
REQUIREMENTS
VAN
8'-0"10'-0"10'-0"
NO PARKING
MAX. SLOPE 1:50 AT H.C.
PARKING SPACES AND
AISLE SHOWN DASHED
TYPICAL SYMBOL
ACCESS AISLE W/ 4"
PAINTED STRIPES.
12" WHITE LETTERING
CROSSWALK TO RAMP
ACCESSIBLE
PARKING SIGN
SEE 12/A1.7 TYP.
COLOR EQUAL TO
No. 15090 FEDERAL
STANDARD 595B
TWO COATS OF PAINT ON
SURFACE OF PARKING AREA
CENTERED ON STALL
2" WIDE WHITE STRIPING TYP.
TWO COATS AT FLOOR PAINT
COND. NOTE: DIMENSIONS
ARE
FOR THE 3'-0" SQUARE SIGN 9"
SQ STEEL SIGN TO BE
PROPORTIONAL
3'-0" SQ. (FLOOR PAINTED)
9" SQ. (POST MOUNTED)
AC PAVEMENT
AGGREGATE BASE
CONC. PER PLAN
3'-0"3'-0"1'-0"1'-0"
SCALE:
PAVEMENT TRANSITION
(PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE)
1/2"=1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02520025
NOTES:
1. INSTALLATION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.
#4 REBAR STIRRUPS
& HORIZONTAL
REINFORCEMENT
EMBEDMENT
SLEEVE & HINGING LID
LOCKABLE LID
4" Ø LOCKABLE
REMOVABLE BOLLARD
DOMED TOP
CAL PIPE SECURITY
BOLLARD IBP04040, OR
APPROVED EQUAL
SCALE:
BOLLARD
(LOCKABLE / REMOVABLE)
N.T.S P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02830022
21"
21" MIN. OR TO
FROST DEPTH,
WHICHEVER IS
GREATER
BREAKAWAY LOCK
1'-6"
CONFIRM BOLT SIZE, PATTERN, HEIGHTS
& CONDUIT REQUIREMENTS WITH FLANGE.
3/4" PVC CONDUIT, BURY 24" OR AS REQ.
BY AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION. SEE
PLANS. (INCLUDE EQUIPMENT GROUND
CONDUCTOR PER NEC, BACK TO SOURCE)
PROVIDE EQUIPMENT GROUNDING
CONDUCTOR BACK TO PANEL. INSULATE
AS REQUIRED BY NEC.
NOTE: SEE E1.1 FOR ROUTING
AND CIRCUITING.
FINISHED
GRADE
BOLLARD LIGHT PER FIXTURE SCHEDULE.
PLAN VIEW
EDGE OF
SIDEWALK
BOLLARD
CENTERED IN
BASE
1'-6"
SCALE:
WALKWAY LIGHT BASE/POLE
NTS P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/LANDSCAPE_BOLLARD
NOTE: WHEN LIGHT BOLLARD OCCURES
AS COLORED CONCRETE, THE BASE
CONCRETE SHALL ALSO BE COLORED.
1/2" EXPANSION JOINT FILLER
REFER TO SOILS INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR
ADDITIONAL PAVEMENT INSTALLATION
SPECIFICATIONS.
SEE ARCHITECTURAL & LANDSCAPE SITE PLANS
FOR DECORATIVE STAMPED PATTERN
LOCATIONS IF APPLICABLE.
LONGITUDINAL JOINTS MAYBE CONST JOINTS AT
CONTRACTORS OPTION. TRANSVERSE CONSTR
JOINTS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHENEVER THE
PLACING OF CONCRETE IS SUSPENDED A
SUFFICIENT LENGTH OF TIME THAT THE
CONCRETE MAY BEGIN TO HARDEN.
SAW CUT PER JOINT LAYOUT (SEE PLAN)
NOTE: USE AT ALL FIXED OBJECTS WITHIN
OR ABUTTING PAVED AREA.
INSTALL 1/2"ɸ x 12"L AT 24" 0C SMOOTH STEEL
DOWEL W/ GREASE AT ONE END - INSTALL
WHEN REQ'D BY SOILS ENGINEER.
1/4" MAX (W/ PRE-
MOLDED JOINT FILLER
FLUSH W/ SURFACES)
1/4" MAX. RADIUS AT HAND
FORMED JTS.
1/4" MAX. (SAWED
JOINT)
ISOLATION EXPANSION JOINT
GENERAL NOTES:
1.
2.
3.
4.
SAWED JOINT
CONSTRUCTION JOINTS
PREMOLDED
TOOLED JOINT
1/4"
SCALE:
TYPICAL JOINT CONSTRUCTION
(ALTERNATE CONCRETE PARKING)
1 1/2" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/TYP-JOINT CONST-ALT CONC PARKING
5
2
3
4
7
6
9
8
10
11
1214
13 SCALE:
ENCLOSURE
(TRASH & RECYCLING)
3/16" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-LA MESA/DETAILS/02877021
(SEPARATE PERMIT REQUIRED)
METAL OPAQUE DOOR,
FIELD INSTALL GATE
HINGES - TYP. OF 2
NOTE:
·CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE
OF NON-COMBUSTABLE
CONSTRUCTION
·ALL GATES TO BE
PRE-MANUFACTURED
·GATES AND HINGES TO BE
FIELD INSTALLED
·GATES WILL BE METAL AND
OPAQUE
(3) PAIRS OF 16 GA. RIBBED
METAL GATES WITH MIN. 2"
X 2" X 14" STEEL ANGLE
FRAME AND DIAGONAL
BRACING. CONTINUOUS
WELDS ON ALL JOINTS.
FIELD INSTALL GATE HINGES
VENEER STONE OVER 8"
CMU - PAINT INSIDE
GATE POST (TYP.)
9
-
9
-
9
-
10'-0"
METAL TRELLIS
CURB STOP
(TYP.)
15'-0" CONCRETE
APRON - SEE SITE
PLAN
1 1
2%
SLOPE
1 1
2%
SLOPE
1 1
2%
SLOPE
F.O.G.
STORAGE
TRASH
RECYCLING
TRASH
PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS
15
SCALE:
BIKE DOCK
(SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING)
1/8" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/02830032PS
NOTE:
·INSTALL PER CITY
STANDARDS
·SEE CITY BICYCLE RACK
DETAIL # 7930
(2) 6" x 6" x 2" DIA., FLANGE
MOUNTING PLATE W/ 1" DIA.
MOUNTING HOLES
36"
SCALE: 1/4" - 1'-0"
36"36"36"36"36"
21'
4'-6"4'-6"
PLAN SINGLE SIDE
26"
R=4"
2" WHITE
REFLECTIVE TAPE
WRAPPED AROUND
PIPE, TYP. OF 3
2" DIA. STEEL PIPE,
1/16" THICK , MIN.
3/8" DIA TAMPER
RESISTANT ANCHOR,
2 3/8" LONG, TYP. (4)
EA. PLATE
BASE PLATE, 1/8"
THICK , TYP.
(SEPARATE PERMIT REQUIRED)
CANE BOLTS
(TYP.)
6"
O.H.
6"
O.H.
(3) SETS 16 GA. RIBBED METAL
GATES WITH MIN. 2" X 2" X 14" STEEL
ANGLE FRAME AND DIAGONAL
BRACING. CONTINUOUS WELDS ON
ALL JOINTS. FIELD INSTALL GATE
HINGES
ELEVATION - FRONT
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
ELEVATION - END
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
NOTE:
·CONSTRUCTION
SHALL BE OF
NON-COMBUSTABLE
CONSTRUCTION
·ALL GATES TO BE
PRE-MANUFACTURED
·GATES AND HINGES
TO BE FIELD
INSTALLED
·GATES WILL BE
METAL AND OPAQUE
METAL OPAQUE
DOOR, FIELD
INSTALL GATE
HINGES. TYPICAL
OF (2)
METAL TRELLIS
METAL TRELLIS
SCALE:
TRASH AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURE
1/8" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/TRASHELEV
VENEER STONE OVER 8"
CMU - PAINT INSIDE
GATE POST
GATE POST
(TYP.)WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 11:20 AM samt plot:11/28/2018 6:28 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\arch\a1.7 site details.dwg A1.7c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIASITE DETAILSA1.7
2154215424602448
2436 246024422436
24422436 244224422436 244224602460
244224482460KITCHEN
FRZ.
DRY STOR.
ELEC
WALK-IN
COOLER
FCR
MECH
R.R.
ELEV. EQ.ELEVATORBEAUTY
BEAUTY
CHARTS
MEDS
MAIL
MEDS
RECEPT.
DIRECTOR
EXECUTIVE DISCOVERY
WORK SPACE
SALESSALES
CHARTS
RSD
L.D.
HALL
R.R.
ACTIVITY
R.R.
LINEN
MDF
DINING ROOM
COVERED
POOL
14' x 25'-6"
4'-0" MAX.
DEPTH
STOR.
AL HOUSE-
KEEPING
FITNESS
18 x 37
"MAIN STREET"
WARM
KIT.
LIN.
STOR
CHAIR
STOR
THEATER / CHAPEL
23 SEATS (21 FIXED, 2 H'CAP)
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
STOR.
DINING
SITTING
ELEC
OFFICE
SEATING
R.R.
DYE.
HOUSE
KEEPING
ACTIVITY
24 x 45
STOR.
OFFICE
BISTRO
23 x 25
SHWR.
STOR.
MECH.
R.R.
R.R
R.R
MCMCMC
MC
MC
MC
MC
C
MC
EMER.
FOOD
STOR.
MAINT.
STOR.
AB
STOR.
1055 011031
1040
LIN./
STOR
ELEV.
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
1093
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
HALL CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDORCORRIDORWAIT STAFF
STAIR-3
FIRE SHUTTER
FIRE SHUTTER
FIRE SHUTTER
STAIR-2
SEATING
ELEVATOR
03
C
BBC
C
A
A
B
B
A
B
A
W/DA
A
A
ABBBBB
B
ELEVATOR
EQUIPMENT
ROOM
MCMCMCMC
MC MCMC
MC
MC
MC
MC
MC
MCMCMCMCMCMCMCMC
B
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
ELECT. RM.
B
MEMORY
CARE
COURTYARD
B
ASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
ASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
119
1042
117 115 113 111 109 107 103 101
02
1088
1023
1089
1037
1038
1027
1026
1087
1021
1020
28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21
10851086
1018 1016
101710191030
1029
1039
1032
102104
106
141
139138
140
110
1091
1102
1090
112
116
1041
121
123
125
127
129
131
1095
128
130
132
134
133
135
136
1066
1043
1068
1096
137
1050
1049
1048
1047
1046
1044
1097
1053
1052
1057
1060
1054
1064 1062
1042
1063 1061
1059
1065
1001
1080
1058
1051
1007
1004
02 04 06 08 09 10 11 12
13
14
1008
1009
1103
15
16
07
05
10820301
1002
1003
17
1012
1011 1013
1010
18
1084
19
20
1014
1015
1081
1005
1006
1083
1094
1098
OFFICE
B.O.D
10451067
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY
1077
10781079
A
B
B
B
B
DYE.
1056
1092
CORRIDOR
STAIR-1
1101
1028
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY
B.O.H.
B.O.H.WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 10:26 AM samt plot:11/28/2018 6:32 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\arch\a3.1 1st floor.dwg A3.1c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA1ST FLOOR
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
"A" Studio Units = 32
"B" One Bedroom Units = 68
"C" Two Bedroom Units = 11
TOTAL = 111
TOTAL UNIT MIX
"A" Studio Units = 10
"B" One Bedroom Units = 19
"C" Two Bedroom Units = 4
UNIT MIX - LEVEL ONE = 33
"MC" Studio Units = 28"MC" Studio Units = 28
GRAND TOTAL = 139
Level One = 67,374 sq. ft.
BUILDING AREA
Level Two = 66,281 sq. ft.
TOTAL = 133,655 sq. ft.1ST FLOORPLANA3.1
STOR
ELEVATORR.R.
ELEVATOR
ELEC.12
20972085
2093
2103
ELEVATOR
3
ELEVATOR
EQUIPMENT
ROOM
ELECT. RM.
2009
269
2010
267 265
2087
266
262
263 261 259 249
260
2085
2102
247 245
2007
2008
2006
237 235 233
231 229 227 225 223
2084
221
217
215
220
218
216
228230232
2005
238
240
242
2004
2003
208206204
2001
2002
2081
213211209207205203201
2080
299297295293291289287
285
283
281
2089
2090
279
277
2088
275
273
271
278
280
282
284
257
255
253
251
252
254
256
292
2011
294 296
243
241
239
2012
244246248250
2096209120922082208320862101
20942095WINDOWS TO BELOW / FIRE
SPRINKLER CURTAIN
AL HOUSE-
KEEPING
SEATING
ELEV
LOBBY
KITCHEN
HOOD
CHASE
OPEN TO BELOW
IDF /
STOR.
ADA
LAUNDRY
IDF /
STOR.
SEATING
OPEN TO BELOW
C
B
A
B
B
B
B
A
OFFICE/
TRAINING
DATA
IDF
OPEN TO BELOW
B
B
SEATING
B
"MAIN STREET"CORRIDOR CORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDOR CORRIDORCORRIDOR
CORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDOR
STAIR 2
STAIR 3
SEATING
B A
B B B B AB
C
B
B B B BAAAAAACBB
B
B
A
AABA
A
A
BB
B
B B AA
C
CORRIDOR
CORRIDORSEATING
C
BBC
C
A
B
B
B
A
A
BBB
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
B
B
CORRIDOR
DECK
B
A
STAIR 1
B
B
WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 10:25 AM samt plot:11/28/2018 6:33 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\arch\a3.2 2nd floor.dwg A3.2c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA2ND FLOORPLANA3.2
2nd FLOOR
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
"A" Studio Units = 22
"B" One Bedroom Units = 49
"C" Two Bedroom Units = 7
TOTAL LEVEL TWO = 78
UNIT MIX - LEVEL TWO
BUILDING AREA LEVEL TWO = 66,281 sq. ft.
KITCHENFRZ.DRY STOR.ELECWALK-INCOOLERFCRMECH R.R.ELEV. EQ.ELEVATORBEAUTYBEAUTYCHARTSMEDSMAILMEDSRECEPT.DIRECTOREXECUTIVEDISCOVERYWORK SPACESALESSALESCHARTSRSDL.D.HALLR.R.ACTIVITY R.R.LINENMDFDINING ROOMCOVEREDPOOL14' x 25'-6"4'-0" MAX.DEPTHSTOR.AL HOUSE-KEEPINGFITNESS18 x 37"MAIN STREET"WARMKIT.LIN.STORCHAIRSTORTHEATER / CHAPEL23 SEATS (21 FIXED, 2 H'CAP)ASSISTEDLIVINGCOURTYARDSTOR.DININGSITTINGELECOFFICESEATINGR.R.DYE.HOUSEKEEPINGACTIVITY24 x 45STOR.OFFICEBISTRO23 x 25SHWR.STOR.MECH.R.R.R.RR.RMCMCMCMCMCMCMCCMCEMER.FOODSTOR.MAINT.STOR.ABSTOR.10550110311040LIN./STORELEV.CORRIDORCORRIDOR1093CORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORHALLCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORWAIT STAFFSTAIR-3STAIR-2SEATINGELEVATOR03CBBCCAABBABAAAAABBBBBBELEVATOREQUIPMENTROOMMCMCMCMCMC MCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCBCORRIDORCORRIDORELECT. RM.BMEMORYCARECOURTYARDBASSISTED LIVINGCOURTYARDASSISTED LIVINGCOURTYARD1191042117115113111 10910710310102108810231089103710381027102610871021102028 27 2625 2423 22 2110851086101810161017101910301029103910321021041061411391381401101091110210901121161041121123125127129131109512813013213413313513610661043106810961371050104910481047104610441097105310521057106010541064 106210421063 10611059106510011080105810511007100402 0406 0809 1011 1213141008100911031516070510820301100210031710121011 10131010181084192010141015108110051006108310941098OFFICEB.O.D10451067EXITPASSAGEWAY107710781079ABBBBDYE.10561092CORRIDORSTAIR-111011028EXITPASSAGEWAYEXITPASSAGEWAYB.O.H.B.O.H.12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"15'-034"29'-5"12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"25'-034"31'-714"SUITE CORRIDOR
ELEV.
EQUIP.KITCHEN DINING SITTING PATIO
SEATING
T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
SOIL CORRIDOR
WAIT
STAFF
CORRIDOR DECKCORRIDOR
T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
155.00'
150.00'
160.00'
155.00'
150.00'
160.00'
ENTRY DRIVEWAY
161.2' FFE 161.2' FFE
T.O. PARAPET
TANK FARM ROAD
SUITE
SUITE SUITE
SUITE
SUITE SUITE
DINING
CORRIDORCORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
MEMORY
CARE
COURTYARD 12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"26'-434"T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"26'-434"T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
155.00'
150.00'
160.00'
161.2' FFE 161.2' FFE
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"26'-434"ROAD (DRIVEWAY)
℄
SUITE
SUITE SUITE
SUITE
SUITE SUITE
SUITE SUITE
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"26'-434"T.O. PARAPET
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
155.00'
150.00'
160.00'
CREEK
161.2' FFE 161.2' FFE
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 10:51 AM michaelb plot:11/28/2018 6:34 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\arch\a6.0 building sections.dwg A6.0c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIABUILDINGSECTIONSA6.0SECTIONA
A6.0 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"
SECTION KEY PLAN NOT TO SCALE
SECTIONB
A6.0 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"
B
B
AA
SCALE : D NORTH ELEVATION
1/16"=1'-0"
SCALE : C EAST ELEVATION
1/16"=1'-0"
SCALE : B SOUTH ELEVATION
1/16"=1'-0"
SCALE : A WEST ELEVATION
1/16"=1'-0"
A
D
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
= STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING
COLOR: SW 2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY
ROOF
= PARAPET
ROOF HEIGHTS PER ELEVATIONS
= VINYL FRAMED INSULATED
WINDOWS W/ TRIM
COLOR: BEIGE
= BOARD AND BATT SIDING
SIDING
SIDING
WINDOW
= PTAC COLOR: TO MATCH
ADJACENT BUILDING COLOR, TYP.
PTAC
= STUCCO FINISH (MAIN BODY)
MFR: OMEGA
COLOR: SW 9117 URBAN JUNGLE
SIDING
= HARDIPLANK HORIZONTAL SIDING
COLOR: SW 7507 STONE LION
MFR: SHERWIN WILLIAMS
KEY NOTES
8
9
10
= FASCIA TRIM
COLOR: SW 2844 ROYCROFT MIST GRAY
= DECORATIVE CORBEL
MFR:
TRIM
FASCIA
= CULTURED STONE VENEER: EASTERN
MOUNTAIN LEDGE
COLOR: PROVO CANYON GREY
COLOR: WESTERN RED CEDAR:
STAMPED / ALUMAWOOD
11 = TRELLIS
STONE
COLOR: SW 7040 SMOKEHOUSE
C
B
ELEVATION KEY PLAN
SCALE: N.T.S.
4' 8'0 16'
4' 8'0 16'
4' 8'0 16'
4' 8'0 16'
KITCHEN
FRZ.
DRY STOR.
ELEC
WALK-IN
COOLER
FCR
MECH
R.R.
ELEV. EQ.
BEAUTY
BEAUTY
CHARTS
MEDS
MAIL
MEDS
RECEPT.
DIRECTOR
EXECUTIVE DISCOVERY
WORK SPACE
SALESSALES
CHARTS
RSD
L.D.
HALL
R.R.
ACTIVITY
LINEN
MDF
DINING ROOM
COVERED
POOL
14' x 25'-6"
4'-0" MAX.
DEPTH
STOR.
AL HOUSE-
KEEPING
FITNESS
18 x 37
"MAIN STREET"
WARM
KIT.
LIN.
STOR
CHAIR
STOR
THEATER / CHAPEL
23 SEATS (21 FIXED, 2 H'CAP)
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
STOR.
DINING
SITTING
ELEC
OFFICE
SEATINGR.R.
DYE.
HOUSE
KEEPING
ACTIVITY
24 x 45
STOR.
OFFICE
BISTRO
23 x 25
SHWR.
STOR.
MECH.
R.R.
R.R
R.R
MCMCMC
MC
MC
MC
MC
C
MC
EMER.
FOOD
STOR.
MAINT.
STOR.
AB
STOR.
1055
1031
1040
LIN./
STOR
ELEV.
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
1093 CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
HALL CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
WAIT STAFF
STAIR-3
STAIR-2
SEATING
ELEVATOR
03
C
BBC
C
A
A
B
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
ABBBBB
B
ELEVATOR
EQUIPMENT
ROOM
MCMCMCMC
MC MCMC
MC
MC
MC
MC
MC
MCMCMCMCMCMCMCMC
B
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
ELECT. RM.
B
MEMORY
CARE
COURTYARD
B
ASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
ASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
119
1042
117 115 113 111 109 107 103 101
02
1088
1023
1089
1037
1038
1027
1026
1087
1021
1020
28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21
10851086
1018 1016
101710191030
1029
1039
1032
102104
106
141
139138
140
110
1091
1102
1090
112
116
1041
121
123
125
127
129
131
1095
128
130
132
134
133
135
136
1066
1043
1068
1096
137
1050
1049
1048
1047
1046
1044
1097
1053
1052
1057
1060
1054
1064 1062
1042
1063 1061
1059
1065
1001
1080
1058
1051
1007
1004
02 04 06 08 09 10 11 12
13
14
1008
1009
1103
15
16
07
050301
1002
1003
17
1012
1011 1013
1010
18
1084
19
20
1014
1015
1081
1005
1006
1083
1094
1098
OFFICE
B.O.D
10451067
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY107710781079
A
B
B
B
B DYE.
1056
1092
CORRIDOR
STAIR-1
1101
1028
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY
EXIT
PASSAGEWAY
B.O.H.
B.O.H.
D
12'-1"1st FLR.13'-734"2nd FLR.10'-1"23'-834"1'-63
4"
6 559 288971346
553 443 610108
29
10
842121223
46
8512
4
2
2
2
6
6
6 4
2 6 2 2444
10 4 6
5
2 4 8 6 2 5 2 3 2 4 2 26 5 2
6 4 6 6 8 4
8 9 1 5 2 6 1 5 8 5 2 2 3 5 2 3 2 5 2 3 2 6 2 8 5 2 2 5 8 2 2 8 2 5 6 2 8 5 2 3 2
4 6 4 3 410 10 4 6 3 38 3 6 3 6 6 4 612'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE 12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE
12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE 12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB12'-1"1'-634"10'-1"T.O. PLATE
T.O.
SHEATHING
T.O. PLATE
T.O. SLAB
5222155
777
7 3 6 10 7 6 454
82 2 2 3 5 2 2 2 5 2 6 4 9 5 1 2 4 2 3 2 8 4 2
METAL AWNING ASSEMBLY
(BALCONY AND WINDOW)
1" = 1'-0"P:/WESTMONT LIVING/CA-SAN LUIS OBISPO/DETAILS/MTL AWNING
(2) 1/4" x 5" LAG BOLT AT 6"
SQUARE PLATE WELD TO
ROD PER MANUF. TYP.
1"x3" HSS SUPPORT
WELDED TO PLATE
A
6
12
A
WINDOW / DOOR
RECESSED TRIM
EDGE OF
WINDOW TRIM
2" CLR OF STUCCO CORNER
15
A7.2a
SIM
STANDING SEAM
METAL ROOFING
HSS CAP ENDS
HSS SUPPORTS
AT 2'-0" O.C.
2"x2" HSS SUPPORT
BEAM
SEE ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATION AND
PLAN FOR OPENING SIZE
STANDING SEAM METAL
ROOFING OVER WRB
WINDOW /
DOOR AS
OCCURS
T.O. PLATE
T.O. PLATE
BIDDER DESIGN AWNING
TO SUPPORT SELF
WEIGHT + 20PSF ROOF
LIVE LOAD
CONTINUOUS
VERTICAL 6x6 POST
LOCATED AT
CENTERLINE OF
AWING SUPPORT
BIDDER DESIGNED
3"
VERTICAL GRAIN T&G
EXPOSED AT UNDERSIDE
STAIN TO MATCH
TRELLIS
CONTINUOUS 1x3
LEDGER WITH 1/4" X 5"
LAG BOLTS AT 12" O.C.
SIM.
6"
11
4"
CLR. TYP
SECTION 'A'ELEVATION 'B'
PLAN VIEW
A
ELEV.
6'-3" (TYP.) OR 11'-2" PER PLAN
ELEV.
VERTICAL GRAIN T&G
EXPOSED AT UNDERSIDE
STAIN TO MATCH TRELLIS
1x2 HSS AT 2'-0" O.C. (TYP.)
CONTUINUOUS 3x1 HSS LEDGER
STANDING SEAM METAL
ROOFING
1x2 HSS AT 2'-0" O.C. (TYP.)
2x2 HSS SUPPORT
3x1 HSS
LEDGER
NORTH FACING
SIDE OF AWNING
TO HAVE A SHADE
(WEST ELEVATION
ONLY)
1
1
A6.3
TYP.
4
11 11 EXTERIORBUILDING ELEVATIONSA6.3WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 10:31 AM melanie plot:11/29/2018 10:55 AM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\bldgs\elevations-mcf.dwg Layoutc2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
3018'-6"25'18'-6"18'-6"25'18'-6"18'-6"30'18'-6"LOADING DOCKP L A N T E RLANDSCAPED AREAPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE9'
TYP
9'
TYP
P L A N T E R
FLOOR AREA: 7,973 SF
ROOF ACCESS 53 SF
TOTAL AREA: ± 8,026 SFSWITCHGEAREVSTATIONEVSTATIONAMBULATORYEVSTATIONEVSTATIONCLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEAN
AIR
VEHICLE
CLEAN
AIR
VEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLECLEANAIRVEHICLE 6'-6"GAS SERVICE
ELECTRICAL SERVICE
6" FIRE LINE
1 1/2" DOMESTIC WATER
TELEPHONE SERVICE
30'13'11'7'12'30'
2 8 'WALK12
7
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
SERVICE /
DELIVERIES
CONNECTION
TO RETAIL
PROJECT
SIGN
2
2
3
9
6
6
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
COVEREDENTRYPUBLIC
ART
ACCESSROADASSISTED LIVING
COURTYARD
MEMORY
CARE
COURTYARD PROPOSEDPROPERTY LINEWALKWALK15
T O P O F B A N K
35' S E T B A C K F R O M
T O P O F B A N K
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
ASSISTED
LIVING
COURTYARD
SHORT TERM
BIKE PARKING,
(6) SPACES
PROPOSED
TRANSFORMER
LOCATION AND
FUTURE
GENERATOR
25' x 12'
LOADING
ZONE
NOTE:
DEMO EXISTING
DWELLING AND
ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES
c
FACILITY
VAN
SEE TRACT MAP 3115
FOR PROPOSED
PROPERTY LINES
FLAG
POLE
10
6.4 7.5
9.5
12.5
12.3
11.0
8.6
9.9
13.7
12.8
12.0
10.0
7.9
10.5
9.8
9.4
8.0
0.7
1.0
1.6
2.5
2.7
2.7
2.9
2.4
1.9
1.8
2.1
2.7
2.8
2.3
2.9
1.8 1.9 1.9
2.0
2.1
1.8
2.5
2.8
1.7
2.0 2.0
1.3
4.3
10.2
9.6
4.0
4.8
12.5
10.7
3.7
3.3
9.0
12.3
4.9
5.2
10.9
6.9
6.7
5.4
6.2
2.3
5.2
6.4
4.2
4.0
2.8
3.7
0.8
1.7
4.6
1.5
3.6
11.7
11.3
4.6
13.0
1.5 1.0 1.3
4.9
6.0
8.9
5.2
4.9
2.3
1.5
1.9
11.2
7.3
0.9
5.0
0.5
5.6
1.4
3.6
7.1 6.7
2.2
2.3 2.4
0.8
4.0
1.3
4.4
0.8
4.3
1.2
5.0
0.4
1.6
7.6
1.2
1.7
2.3
2.4
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.5
1.9
1.0
1.7
2.4
3.8
4.2
3.0
2.3
2.1
2.2
2.4
3.6
4.3
3.2
2.1
2.3
2.0
2.3
3.1
4.4
4.4
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.9
4.7
3.8
2.8
2.6
2.7
3.2
4.3
4.0
2.9
3.4
6.3
3.7
5.4
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.9
1.2
1.7
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.7
1.8
1.7
1.9
2.3
2.3
2.1
1.7
1.3
1.1
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.7
1.0
1.5
2.3
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.3
1.9
1.8
2.0
2.5
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.2
1.5
1.2
0.9
0.8
0.8
1.1
1.5
1.9
2.1
2.5
2.7
2.4
2.8
2.4
1.9
1.8
2.0
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.4
1.7
1.4
1.1
0.9
0.8
1.2
1.9
2.6
2.8
3.2
4.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.6
2.9
1.9
3.0
2.5
1.9
2.8
3.8
4.5
4.4
3.4
2.5
1.7
1.2
1.3
1.9
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.2
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.2
4.0
3.1
2.6
2.1
1.6
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.8
1.9
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.9
3.1
2.5
2.1
1.6
1.2
0.9
1.2
1.6
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.8
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.8
2.1
2.0
1.6
1.2
1.2
1.9
2.5
3.8
4.5
3.2
3.2
4.6
4.0
2.6
2.2
1.9
1.8
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.6
1.4
1.9
2.7
4.0
4.6
3.7
3.7
4.7
4.2
2.9
2.3
2.0
1.9
2.9
2.8
2.9
2.7
2.2
2.2
2.5
3.2
4.0
3.6
2.4
2.2
3.3
2.7
3.0
2.7
1.7
1.4
2.3
2.9
3.5
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.1
3.7
3.0
2.6
2.1
1.8
1.8
2.1
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.2
2.2
2.5
3.0
3.3
3.4
3.2
2.7
2.3
1.5
2.6
3.7
4.1
4.1
2.8
1.4
1.6
2.3
3.1
3.8
4.1
4.5
4.4
4.4
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.3
2.6
2.2
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.8
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.3
3.3
3.3
2.8
2.1
1.6
1.7
4.3
4.8
4.6
3.4
2.1
1.7
2.3
2.9
3.2
3.6
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.5
3.2
2.8
2.2
2.0
3.6
5.0
4.6
3.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.3
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.6
1.4
4.3
3.6
2.6
1.4
3.4
3.0
3.1
4.4
3.6
3.2
4.2
3.1
2.1
1.9
4.3
4.0
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
4.8
3.7
2.1
1.0
7.4
4.0
3.8
7.7
3.9
3.0
8.5
4.7
2.2
2.4
4.1
3.6
1.9
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.2
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.9
7.1
3.3
1.4
0.7
4.0
1.6
0.9
0.5
1.7
1.3
0.8
0.4
3.2
1.8
0.8
0.3
4.0
1.3
0.5
0.3
1.5
0.7
0.4
0.3
1.4
1.4
1.0
0.5
3.9
2.9
1.2
0.5
6.0
2.1
0.7
0.4
2.0
1.0
0.7
0.5
1.8
1.7
1.0
0.6
4.8
2.3
1.0
0.6
3.7
1.6
1.0
0.7
1.9
1.4
1.0
2.0
1.8
1.4
0.9
2.4
2.0
1.6
2.6
2.9
2.4
4.0
3.5
4.4
3.9
3.6
3.3
2.7
2.4
0.9
1.8
1.8
1.9
2.1
2.1
3.4
2.5
1.5
1.7
2.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.2
2.0
3.2
2.7
3.2
3.6
3.1
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.7
3.2
3.7
0.7
0.8
2.6
2.8
2.4
1.9
2.1
2.6
3.6
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.6
3.9
3.6
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.3
3.6
3.5
2.8
2.4
2.0
2.8
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.0
2.8
2.9
3.2
3.6
3.7
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.4
4.2
4.8
4.8
3.6
2.6
2.4
2.2
1.9
1.2
1.3
1.7
2.5
2.8
2.7
2.9
2.4
2.1
2.3
2.8
3.3
3.6
3.8
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.8
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.6
2.1
1.0
1.6
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.7
3.0
3.0
3.4
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.7
4.4
4.5
3.6
2.5
2.2
1.9
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.7
2.2
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.3
2.7
2.7
2.9
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.2
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.4
1.9
1.5
0.6
1.0
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.3
2.5
3.1
3.8
4.0
3.1
2.3
1.7
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.6
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0
0.8
SA5
SA4
SA2
SA4
SA4
SA4
SA4
SA4
SA4
SA4
SA2
SA2
SA2
SA5
SA5
SA5
SB
SBSSSS
SF
SW1 SW1
SW1
SW1
SW1 SW1
SW3
SW3
SW3
SW1
SW2
SW1
SW1
SW1
SW1
SW1
SW1
SW3
SW3
SW3
SW3
SW1
SW1 SW1
TYPE SC
TYP. OF 24
SB SB
SB
SB
SB
SB
WESTMONT OF SAN LUIS OBISPODATE
SHEET
REVISED DATE
save:11/13/2018 11:21 AM samt plot:11/28/2018 6:46 PM melanie ryan file:p:\westmont living\ca-san luis obispo\elec\lighting\site-lighting.dwg E1.1c2018 Lenity Architecture11/29/18 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA150 30 60 120
SCALE: 1" = 30'
SITE LIGHTING
PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
Statistics
Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min
ENTRY 10.1 fc 13.7 fc 6.4 fc 2.1:1 1.6:1
PARKING 2.3 fc 7.7 fc 0.3 fc 25.7:1 7.7:1
SIDEWALK 4.1 fc 13.0 fc 0.4 fc 32.5:1 10.3:1
Schedule
Label Mount
Height Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number Description Lamp
Number
Lamps Filename Lumens Per
Lamp
Light Loss
Factor Wattage
SA2
20'4 Lithonia Lighting DSX0 LED P6 40K T2M
MVOLT HS
DSX0 LED P6 40K T2M MVOLT with
houseside shield
LED 1 DSX0_LED_P6_40K
_T2M_MVOLT_HS.ie
s
13054 0.95 134
SA4
20'8 Lithonia Lighting DSX0 LED P6 40K TFTM
MVOLT HS
DSX0 LED P6 40K TFTM MVOLT with
houseside shield
LED 1 DSX0_LED_P6_40K
_TFTM_MVOLT_HS.i
es
12465 0.95 134
SA5
20'4 Lithonia Lighting DSX0 LED P6 40K T5M
MVOLT
DSX0 LED P6 40K T5M MVOLT LED 1 DSX0_LED_P6_40K
_T5M_MVOLT.ies
16575 0.95 134
SB
3'6"8 Lithonia Lighting DSXB LED 16C 530 40K
SYM
D-SERIES BOLLARD WITH 16 4000K
LEDS OPERATED AT 530mA AND
SYMMETRIC DISTRIBUTION
LED 1 DSXB_LED_16C_53
0_40K_SYM.ies
2397 0.95 28
SC
Underside
of Ceiling
33 COOPER LIGHTING -
- HALO
SLD612940WH HALO 6 INCH SURFACE LED
DOWNLIGHT
LED 1 SLD612940WH.ies 1000 0.95 14.8
SF 1'1 Lithonia Lighting DSXF1 LED P1 40K NSP DSXF1 LED P1 40K NSP LED 1 DSXF1_LED_P1__4
0K_NSP.ies
2876 0.95 21
SS 1'2 Lithonia Lighting DSXF1 LED P1 40K MFL DSXF1 LED P1 40K MFL LED 1 DSXF1_LED_P1__4
0K_MFL.ies
2692 0.95 21
SW1
9'34 WAC Lighting WS-W20506 Wall Mount LED 1 W20506-
C14100003_IESNA
2002.ies
866 0.95 16.8
SW2
11'3 WAC Lighting DS-WS05-F35S-WT Wall Mount Tube LED 1 DS-WS05-F35S-
WT.IES
1453 0.95 23.8
SW3 14'9 Lithonia Lighting WST LED P3 40K VF MVOLT WST LED, Performance package 3,
4000 K, visual comfort forward
throw, MVOLT
LED 1 WST_LED_P3_40K_
VF_MVOLT.ies
6609 0.95 50
Spill onto RZ 0.0 fc 0.3 fc 0.0 fc NA NA
20'2'-0"18'-0"ELECTRICALSITEPLANE1.1