HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 16 - COUNCIL READING FILE_b_Initial Study Negative DeclarationSan Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
San Luis Obispo Active
Transportation Plan Initial
Study Negative Declaration
NOVEMBER 2020
Prepared for:
City of San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department
919 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Prepared by:
Alta Planning + Design, Inc.
617 W 7th Street, Suite 1103
Los Angeles, CA 90017
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
1
INITIAL STUDY – NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Title:
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
(805) 781-7590
Afukushima@slocity.org
Project Location:
The City of San Luis Obispo’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP) applies to all areas and plans/projects within the
City of San Luis Obispo limits. Figure 1 shows the regional location, and Figure 2 shows the plan location.
Regional Location and Setting
The City of San Luis Obispo is located in the Central Coast Region of California along U.S. Highway 101 (U.S.
101), approximately 230 miles south of San Francisco and 190 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. San Luis
Obispo is accessible via U.S. 101 from the north and south, State Route 1 (SR 1) from the northwest, and State Route
227 (SR 227) from the south.
Local Setting
The City is characterized by a mild Mediterranean climate that is moderated by the influence of the Pacific Ocean,
located approximately 10 miles to the west. The City receives approximately 20 inches of rain annually, 287 sunny
days per year, with a July high temperature of 74°F and a January low temperature of 43°F.
The City encompasses approximately 10.7 square miles of land in a narrow valley between the coastal Santa Lucia
Mountains on the east, which reach an elevation of up to 3,000 feet, and the Nine Sisters volcanic hills on the west.
The San Luis Obispo Creek bisects the City and is a defining feature of the Downtown District. The City also has a
permanent open space greenbelt at its edges.
Surrounding Uses
The City is surrounded by unincorporated San Luis Obispo County land characterized by agricultural uses
(vineyards, field crops) and open space containing oak woodland and grasslands habitat. Distinctive facilities and
land uses proximate to the City include California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly), Cuesta
College, and San Luis Obispo Military Camp to the north, San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and numerous
vineyards and wineries to the south, Los Padres National Forest to the east, and the Irish Hills to the west.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
2
Figure 1- Regional Location
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
3
Figure 2- Plan Setting
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
4
Existing Setting
Historical and Demographic Setting
The history of San Luis Obispo dates back to 1772 when Junipero Serra founded Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa. The
City was officially incorporated in 1856. According to the City’s General Plan Annual Report, the City’s population in
2019 is 46,802. Since 2011, the population in the City has grown by around 1,500, an average rate of 0.4 percent per year,
while the County of San Luis Obispo also grew at an average rate of 0.4 percent per year during this period.
Existing Plans and Documents
City San Luis Obispo General Plan – Circulation Element
The City of San Luis Obispo updated the Circulation Element of its General Plan in 2015 The City's general plan guides
the use and protection of various resources to meet community purposes. The general plan is published in separately
adopted sections, called elements, which address various topics. This Circulation Element describes how the city plans to
provide for the transportation of people and materials within San Luis Obispo with connections to county areas and
beyond. The General Plan Circulation Element provides the foundation policies for walking and biking in the City of San
Luis Obispo. Within section 1.7 there are two main policies that provide the context of bicycle and pedestrian planning,
C 1.7. Transportation Objectives:
1. Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation (as shown on Table 1) and depend less on the single‐
occupant use of vehicles.
2. Ask the San Luis Obispo Regional Transportation Agency to establish an objective similar to #1 and support
programs that reduce the interregional use of single‐occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternative
forms of transportation.
Additionally, bicycling and walking policies are shown in sections four and five of the Circulation Element of the General
Plan. These desired mode splits and policies are at the very core of the ATP and established the importance of walking
and biking in the City of San Luis Obispo. These are ambitious goals that require substantial investment, coordination and
planning; the ATP will act as guidance for proposed projects and programs to achieve the goals and mode share set by the
City Council and established in the City’s General Plan.
San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan
Compared with the 2012 Climate Action Plan (CAP), the 2020 CAP Update puts more emphasis on carbon-free electricity
and General Plan transportation mode split. Measures from the 2012 CAP Update were removed and replaced with new
foundational actions and supporting measures. The CAP Update builds upon the goals of the 2012 CAP and is based on a
more recent inventory for the City. The CAP Update is organized into six pillars, each of which includes a long-term goal,
measures, and foundational actions. Altogether, these measures and foundational actions are intended to reduce
communitywide greenhouse (GHG) emissions by 43 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and by 66 percent below 1990
Table 1- Desired Mode Split
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
5
levels by 2035, which provides substantial progress toward meeting the City carbon neutrality goal while exceeding in
time the State carbon neutrality goal.
A major part of GHG emissions are from the transportation sector. To meet the emissions goal outlined in the CAP there
needs to be a significant reduction in transportation emissions to 26%. To achieve that reduction there needs to be a large
shift in single occupancy vehicle trips to active transportation trips both walking and biking. The ATP will play a pivotal
role as a guiding document to implement a well-connected and safe active transportation network.
Proposed Projects with Completed Environmental Documents
The following proposed projects in the ATP are already approved projects and have adopted environmental documents
with corresponding impacts and required mitigation measures. These projects are approved, but have not yet been
constructed, which is why they are included in the ATP.
1) Bob Jones Pathway Octagon Barn Connection (Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration)
2) Railroad Safety Trail Project, Taft to Pepper Street (Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration)
In addition, the City Council has approved the San Luis Ranch and Froom Ranch Specific Plans, and Avila Ranch
Development Plan, which contain proposed projects identified in the ATP. The ATP includes the infrastructure projects
identified in these Specific Plans and Development Plan to ensure consistency among plans. Upon approval of the Specific
Plans and Development Plan, the City certified associated Environmental Impact Reports, which identify potential impacts
and required mitigation measures.
These environmental documents referenced above are available at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo CA 93401 and online
at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents-
online/environmental-review-documents
The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan is available at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, and online at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/specific-area-
plans/san-luis-ranch
The Froom Ranch Specific Plan is available at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, and online at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/specific-area-
plans/froom-ranch
The Avila Ranch Development Plan is available at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, and online at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/specific-area-
plans/avila-ranch
General Plan Designations and Zoning:
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
6
The Active Transportation Plan would be implemented throughout the City and would occur in all General Plan
designations and in all zoning designations.
Description of the Project:
The ATP (Attachment 1) will be the guiding document for active transportation in the City of San Luis Obispo. The 2020
ATP will supersede the existing 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan as the planning document that provide
recommendations for the improvements to walking and bicycling in San Luis Obispo. The ATP contains various programs,
policies, and recommendations pertaining to the development of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. ATP proposes expansion
of and improvements to the City’s existing shared-use paths, bike lanes and routes, sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle
bridges, and crosswalks. The proposed networks are designed to build upon existing shared-use paths; to connect regional
routes and paths; to provide access to key destinations; and to serve as recreational assets.
The City of San Luis Obispo has a legacy of promoting active transportation, resulting in the City being a great place to
walk and bike. The San Luis Obispo ATP will make existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities safer and will increase
connectivity to key destinations within the City. The recommendations included in this Plan are meant to enhance non-
motorized travel infrastructure and create more travel options for the residents of San Luis Obispo.
The Goals of the Active Transportation Plan:
• Increase the number of trips completed by biking and walking.
• Provide a network of safe, efficient, and enjoyable facilities to support walking and bicycling.
• Provides active transportation connections to community destinations such as employment centers, schools,
grocery and shopping centers, senior facilities, recreation centers, and transit stops.
• Reduce air pollution, asthma rates, and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Ensure that disadvantaged communities are actively engaged in the planning process and help shape the projects
in their neighborhoods.
Outreach to California Native American Tribes
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.?
The City has provided notice of the opportunity to consult with appropriate Native American Tribes about the project
consistent with City and State regulations including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill 52. There was no response or
requests for consultation from the native American Tribes that were provided the notification.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
7
Program vs Project Level California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Analysis
The Project (under CEQA), is the adoption of the proposed ATP for the City of San Luis Obispo. The ATP is a
program/policy-level document, which means it does not provide project-specific construction details that would allow
for project-level CEQA analysis. Furthermore, specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and adoption
of this CEQA document would not authorize any development. Information such as precise project locations, project
timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings will be required in
order for future “project-level” CEQA analysis to occur. Therefore, this CEQA document has been prepared at a “program-
level.” Under CEQA, a programmatic document is prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large
project and/or for a project that will be implemented over a long period of time. This CEQA document, prepared at a
program level, is therefore adequate for adoption of the ATP by San Luis Obispo City Council.
Required Approvals:
City of San Luis Obispo
Required approvals include:
Adoption of the Active Transportation Plan Initial Study -Negative Declaration.
Other public agencies whose approval is required:
No other agency approval is required.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
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 California 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)).
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
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.
☐
November 13, 2020
Signature Date
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name Community Development Director
Tyler Corey, Principal Planner
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study / Negative Declaration
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 receptor s
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
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020
1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099,
would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c)
The San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation/Open Space and Circulation Elements identify viewing corridors and
scenic roadways with high or moderate value as well as visual landmarks. The applicable goals and policies from
these City General Plan elements include:
▪ 9.1.1 Preserve Natural and Agricultural Landscapes: The City will implement the following policies and will
encourage other agencies with jurisdictions to do likewise:
□ Natural and agricultural landscapes that the City has not designated for urban use shall be maintained in their
current patterns of use.
□Any Development that is permitted in natural or agricultural landscapes shall be visually subordinate to and
compatible with the landscape features. Development includes, but is not limited to buildings, signs (including
billboard signs), roads, utility and telecommunication lines and structures. Such development shall:
− Avoid visually prominent locations such as ridgelines, and slopes exceeding 20 percent.
− Avoid unnecessary grading, vegetation removal, and site lighting.
− Incorporate building forms, architectural materials, and landscaping, that respect the setting, including the historical
pattern of development in similar settings, and avoid stark contrasts with its setting.
− The City’s non-emergency repair, maintenance, and small construction projects in highly visible locations, such as
hillsides and downtown creeks, where scenic resources could be affected, shall be subject to at least “minor or
incidental” architectural review.
▪ 9.1.3 Utilities and Signs: In and near public streets, plazas, and parks, features that clutter, degrade, intrude on, or
obstruct views shall be avoided. Necessary features, such as utility and communication equipment, and traffic
equipment and signs should be designed and placed so as to not impinge upon or degrade scenic views of the Morros
or surrounding hillsides, or farmland, consistent with the primary objective of safety. New billboard signs shall not be
allowed, and existing billboard signs shall be removed as soon as practicable, as provided in the Sign Regulations.
▪ 9.1.5 View Protection in New Development: The City will include in all environmental review and carefully
consider effects of new development, streets, and road construction on views and visual quality by applying the
Community Design Guidelines, height restrictions, hillside standards, Historical Preservation Program Guidelines,
and the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
12
▪ 9.2.1 Views to and from Public Places, including Scenic Roadways: The City will preserve and improve views of
important scenic resources from public places and encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to do so. Public places
include parks, plazas, the grounds of civic buildings, streets and roads, and publicly accessible open space. In
particular, the route segments shown in Figure 10 are designated as scenic roadways.
□ Development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views.
□ Utilities, traffic signals, and public and private signs and lights shall not intrude on or clutter views, consistent with
safety needs.
□ Where important vistas of distant landscape features occur along streets, street trees shall be clustered to facilitate
viewing of the distant features.
□ Development projects, including signs, in the viewshed of a scenic roadway shall be considered “sensitive” and
require architectural review.
▪ 9.3.5 Visual Assessments: Require evaluations (accurate visual simulations) for projects affecting important scenic
resources and views from public places.
▪ 9.3.6 View Blockage along Scenic Highways: Determine that view blockage along scenic roadways is a significant
impact.
▪ 9.3.9 Undergrounding Utilities: Place existing overhead utilities underground, with highest priority for scenic
roadways, entries to the city, and historical districts.
The ATP would not involve land use or zoning changes. As a policy document, the ATP would not result in impacts
related to scenic vistas and visual character. However, implementation of proposed projects in the ATP such as
bicycle and pedestrian paths, sidewalks, grade separated crossings and bicycle and pedestrian supporting
infrastructure may promote infrastructure development and redevelopment. However, discretionary development
would be required to adhere to City development regulations and General Plan policies, including San Luis Obispo
Street Tree Ordinance No. 1544, to retain character of the City and minimize environmental impacts. In addition,
discretionary development would be reviewed for consistency with the General Plan and other applicable regulatory
land use actions prior to approval. Thus, the ATP would result in a less than significant impact related to scenic
vistas and visual character or scenic quality.
d) The project will not introduce elements which would create new sources of substantial light or glare. Any proposed
bicycle or pedestrian facilities are subject to conformance with the City Night Sky Preservation Ordinance requirements
which set maximum illumination level and require sufficient shielding of light sources to minimize glare and preserve
night time views. All bicycle and pedestrian projects included in the plan will be required to conform to standards of the
City’s Nigh Sky Preservation Ordinance. Class I shared use path lighting is required to comply with City standards. Any
lighting placement is required to comply with the policies in the Active Transportation Plan which calls for lighting
along creeks to be designated to shine away from the creek corridor or not be installed at locations where impacts cannot
be mitigated. Additionally, the pedestrian lighting recommended in the ATP will meet the City standards and match
existing pedestrian lighting. The project does not have the potential to adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area. Less than Significant Impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
13
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: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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))?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) e) The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, but future development of project
components contained in the ATP could potentially impact areas used for agricultural purposes or which contain prime
farmland, unique farmland, farmland of statewide important, forest land, or involve a Williamson Act contract.
Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the City would identify the
potential impacts to these areas and mitigation measures that would reduce any impacts to a less than significant level.
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling
in San Luis Obispo. It is intended to be a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete
network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations
around the City. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms,
material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that
specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis, as
necessary. In cases where proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities are located in areas which contain agricultural or
forestry resources, impacts and mitigations measures would be identified to reduce impacts to less than significant. Less
than significant impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
14
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than significant.
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: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
f) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
h) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
i) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct air quality impacts, but future development of
project components contained in the ATP could create a less than significant impact due to construction or maintenance
activities. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the City would
identify the potential air quality impacts and mitigation measures that would reduce any impacts to a less than significant
level.
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling
in San Luis Obispo and increasing use of those transportation modes. The goal of the ATP is to encourage and increase
bicycle ridership and walking trips which can replace existing driving trips that would be a net benefit to air quality.
The ATP itself does not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations nor does it result in other
emissions such as odors.
Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types
of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual
projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary
Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s
General Plan and other relevant regulatory documents. Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any air quality
impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any
development. Less than Significant Impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
15
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) e) f) The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, but future development of project
components contained in the ATP could potentially affect protected biological species and/or habitats. Construction and
operation of trails, paths, signage, etc. may occur in biologically sensitive areas. Individual projects would be subject to site-
specific environmental review, at which time the City would identify the potential presence of endangered or listed species and
mitigation measures that would reduce any impacts to a less than significant level. All construction-related potential impacts
resulting from construction run-off would be addressed through adherence to the City’s MS4 General Stormwater Permit from
the State Water Board.
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in San
Luis Obispo. It is intended to be a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails,
walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City. Individual
project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and
ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the
implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis, as necessary. In cases where proposed bicycle and pedestrian
facilities are located in areas which contain riparian habitat, or are located within creek setbacks, creek setback regulations of
the City’s Zoning Regulations would apply. In addition to standard City policies and regulations, the previous 2013 Bicycle
Transportation Plan (BTP) includes policies and standard mitigation for locating bikeways near creeks to reduce the level of
biological impact to less than significant levels. While this ATP supersedes and replaces the 2013 BTP, it carries forward all of
its policies and standard mitigation for locating bikeways near creeks to reduce the level of biological impacts to less than
significant levels.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
16
Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan
and other relevant regulatory documents. Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any biological impacts because specific
development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historic resource pursuant to §15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 14.01 Historic Preservation Ordinance requires designation of historic
resources and sites. According to the City’s General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element there are five historic
districts that include a multitude of Master and Contributing List Historical Properties. In addition, significant historic
and prehistoric sites have been identified in the Downtown and Old Town Historic Districts, and throughout the City
limits. The ATP proposes bicycle and pedestrian projects throughout the City. Adoption of the ATP alone would not
have a significant impact on any identified historical properties or historic or prehistoric sites because specific
development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.
Additionally, as part of the required environmental clearance for the construction of bike and pedestrian facilities
including but not limited to shared use paths and grade separated crossings, consistency with the City’s Archaeological
Resource Preservation Guidelines will be required, which would include additional surveys and evaluation for areas
identified as Sensitive. If potential cultural resources are found during construction, the City’s Guidelines require that
construction ceases until a qualified archaeologist determines the extent of the resources, and the Community
Development Director approves appropriate protective measures. Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
17
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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
a) b) The City of San Luis Obispo has demonstrated its commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy through
many efforts. The City has adopted the California Green Building Standards Code, per San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code Chapter 15.02, which requires efficiency measures to reduce energy use, and provide energy reduction benefits.
The ATP does recommend projects and lighting to support walking and biking throughout the community. The amounts
of energy needed during construction and operation of lighting is minimal and would not result in significant energy
needs. In addition, any use of energy for construction projects would be temporary and not result in significant
environmental impact. The ATP is a programmatic document. During construction of all facilities, the implementing
agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary, including an evaluation of potentially significant
environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation. Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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.
13 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
18
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a.i) ii) iii) iv) b) c) d)
The City of San Luis Obispo is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California and strong ground shaking should
be expected during the life of the proposed structures. San Luis Obispo is located in a seismically active region and is identified
as a Landslide Zone by the California Department of Conservation. In 2014, the City adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
(LHMP) to assess hazards and reduce risks prior to a disaster event and fully cover the necessity to address seismic and geological
hazards. In addition, all development projects are required to conform to applicable provisions of the current California Building
Code.
The ATP is a programmatic and guidance document and does not propose development or changes to land use and zoning. As a
policy document, the ATP would not directly require ground disturbing activities. However, implementation of the bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure in the ATP may promote infrastructure development and redevelopment. The ATP includes proposed
shared use paths, sidewalks and other bicycle and pedestrian supportive infrastructure. As such, the ATP could result in
construction-related soil erosion and topsoil loss impacts associated with such installations. However, discretionary development
would be required to conduct geotechnical studies and adhere to related geology and soils recommendations prior to final siting
and construction as part of a site-specific CEQA analysis. Therefore, the ATP would result in a less-than-significant impact
related to soil erosion, loss of topsoil, and the presence of unstable soils.
Less and Significant Impact.
e) The ATP does not include the construction of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No Impact.
f) The ATP is a programmatic document. During construction of all facilities, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific
CEQA analysis as necessary, including an evaluation of potential impacts to paleontological resources. Less than significant
impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
19
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment? 1,8 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 8 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
a) b) The City of San Luis Obispo has recently adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) which provides Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
thresholds, policies, and transportation mode share goals for the City. The ATP will be the guiding document to improve
the mode share of walking and bicycling and increasing these two modes would reduce GHG citywide. The City’s General
Plan and CAP have the stated goals of having the mode share of 20% for bicycling and 18% for walking and other forms
of transportation. The ATP’s goal is to provide the recommended projects, programs and policies to achieve those mode
share goals. The ATP complements and facilitates the applicable GHG plans, policies and regulations; therefore, the ATP
will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases. No impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
20
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?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?
7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) In 2014, the City adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) to assess hazards and reduce risks of those hazards.
The ATP is a programmatic document and would not expose the public to hazardous materials and does not require
or involve the use, transportation, disposal or emissions of hazardous materials. Individual projects such as the
construction of bike and pedestrian paths, sidewalks, or supporting infrastructure would be subject to site-specific
environmental review, at which time the City would identify the potential exposure of the public to hazardous
materials but would reduce any impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant impact.
e) The ATP is a programmatic document and would not in itself result in airport related safety hazards. The bicycle and
pedestrian facilities recommended in the plan which may be within the airport land use area would be subject to site-
specific environmental review, at which time the City would identify any potential impacts and would reduce any
impacts to a less than significant level. Less than significant impact.
f) The ATP does not impede access for emergency response because it is a programmatic document. The ATP does not
involve site-specific development, nor would it facilitate new development that would interfere with adopted
emergency plans. Individual projects such as Class I shared use paths, sidewalks, or other bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure from the ATP would undergo site-specific CEQA analysis. Therefore, the ATP itself would result in a
less than significant impact related to impairment or interference with implementation of an emergency response or
evacuation plan.
g) According to California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFIRE), San Luis Obispo is not located in
designated California Fire Hazard Severity Zones,49 or in State Responsibility Areas. No impact associated with
wildland fires would occur. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the urban reserve consists of low
to moderate fire hazard rates. High and extreme fire hazard rates closely surround the San Luis Obispo urban reserve.
However, according to CalFIRE, there are five areas categorized as very high fire hazard severity zones within the
local responsibility area (LRA). However, these areas are located on the outer fringes of the city boundaries and the
ATP does not propose specific development or other physical changes to the environment through would be put at
risk in the case of a wildland fire. Therefore, the ATP would result in a less than significant impact related to risks
associated with exposure to wildland fires.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
21
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or offsite;
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c i) ii) iii) iv) d) e) The ATP is a programmatic document and does not propose development or changes to land use
and zoning, in addition the City is not located within designated seiche or tsunami zones. Thus, the ATP itself would
not result in construction or operational impacts related to alterations in polluted runoff. Implementation of proposed
projects contained in the ATP may promote infrastructure development and redevelopment including Class I paths,
sidewalks, or other pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Construction of infrastructure development and redevelopment
could result in erosion and potential redirect of flood flows or drainage patterns; however, implementation of proposed
actions would not include large-scale construction within San Luis Obispo. Additionally, discretionary development
would be required to undergo CEQA review, including assessment and mitigation incorporation, including the
implementation of a SWPP and compliance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations once project details
and locations are known. Therefore, the ATP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to polluted runoff.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
22
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
a) b) ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in San
Luis Obispo. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails,
walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City. The
ATP is in alignment with existing land use plans, polices and regulations and will have no impacts to land use planning.
No impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
a) b) The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan does not identify any mineral resources or mineral resources recovery sites
within the City and no impacts would occur to mineral resources. No impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
23
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
6 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
12 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
d) a) b) c) The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is the only public airport or airstrip located in San Luis Obispo.
The airport and adjoining Airport Safety zone are located in the southern portion of the City limits, at 975 Airport Drive.
Adoption of the ATP alone would not expose people to unacceptable noise levels and would not generate noise levels in
excess of the City’s Noise Ordinance because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not
authorize any development. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will
conduct site-specific CEQA analysis, as necessary. The ATP is a programmatic document containing proposed projects
and programs that are consistent with the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan. Some of the proposed projects including
but not limited to bike and pedestrian trails in the ATP are within the vicinity of the airport, which may result in a
temporary increase in groundborne vibration or noise levels during construction. However, discretionary development
would be subject to review by the City for compliance with the General Plan and Municipal Code, and would be required
to comply with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations. Additionally, the ATP encompasses a suite of
opportunities that would decrease motor vehicle traffic and traffic-related noise. As such, implementation of the ATP
would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels. Therefore, the ATP would result in a less-than-
significant impact related to noise.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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)?
3 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
24
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
a) b) The ATP is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails,
walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City. The
ATP will help connect existing and future housing to community destinations. The ATP will not induce population growth
or displace people or housing. No impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
Adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and would not result in growth that would require the
assemblage of additional fire or police resources, or the expansion of any schools or other public facilities. The proposed adoption
of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP
(trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially increase the need for security for pedestrians and bicyclists utilizing these
facilities. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency
would identify the potential public service-related impacts.
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in City.
It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails, walkways and
bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City. Furthermore,
implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan and other
relevant regulatory documents.
Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any public service impacts because specific development is not being proposed
under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. No impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
25
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: No Impact.
16. RECREATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
5 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) ATP is intended to increase the pedestrian and bicycle recreational opportunities for the residents of the City and thu s will
have a beneficial impact on recreational facilities and opportunities. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate
vision of a connected and complete network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable
connections to key destinations around the City. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing,
material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that
specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as
necessary. Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
26
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) The transportation goals, policies and thresholds are determined by the City’s General Plan Circulation Element and
supported by the City’s Climate Action Plan. The ATP proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking
and bicycling in the City. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete
network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations
around the City. The projects and programs recommended in the ATP are intended to improve access and use of
transportation modes other than the automobile, which is anticipated to reduce citywide vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
For this reason, proposed ATP would result in a less than significant impact per CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b).
Additionally, State CEQA Guidelines sections 15301(c) generally applies to most bicycle projects as it qualifies them
as a minor alteration of the existing highway because it repurposes space in the existing paved roadway through
placement of striping, landscaping, and posts that are all considered exempt activity under CEQA, and does not expand
the physical area which could contribute to a physical impact to environmentally sensitive resources (i.e., biology,
geology cultural, historic, etc.), nor does it substantially alter the existing use of the street.
The proposed ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components
contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially impact existing roadways and
intersections. For instance, if new crosswalks or bicycle lanes are proposed, these projects could require additional
project-level analysis to determine their impacts to (and safety from) roadway and vehicular activity. Additionally,
construction activities will require various vehicular trips to and from the various project sites. However, these will
be minimal and temporary. In the event that partial or full road closure is necessary during project construction, the
contractor will be required to adhere to any and all regulations from the local jurisdiction, Caltrans and/or other
regulatory agency. Individual projects would be evaluated by the City Public Works and Fire Departments for
consistency with applicable engineering standards and emergency response policies. In addition, individual projects
would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the
potential transportation-related impacts. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with
the goals and policies under the General Plan, and other relevant regulatory documents. Based on these considerations,
the proposed ATP is considered to result in a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
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: Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
27
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.
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) In accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, on September 8, 2020 potentially affected Tribes were formally notified
of this Project and were given the opportunity to request consultation on the Project. The City of San Luis Obispo has
provided notice of the opportunity to consult with appropriate Native American Tribes about the project consistent with
City and State regulations including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill 52. There was no response or requests for
consultation from the native American Tribes that were provided the notification.
The ATP is a programmatic document and does not propose development or changes to land use and zoning. Thus,
the ATP itself would not result in construction or operational impacts related to tribal cultural resources. As a policy
document, the ATP would not directly require ground disturbing activities. However, implementation of projects
identified in the ATP may result in infrastructure development and redevelopment such as bicycle and pedestrian
paths, sidewalks, grade separated crossings that could impact unknown tribal cultural resources. As part of the
required environmental clearance for the construction of bike and pedestrian facilities including but not limited to
shared use paths and grade separated crossings, consistency with the City’s Archaeological Resource Preservation
Guidelines will be required, which would include additional surveys and evaluation for areas identified as Sensitive. If
potential cultural resources are found during construction, the City’s Guidelines require that construction ceases until
a qualified archaeologist determines the extent of the resources, and the Community Development Director approves
appropriate protective measures. In addition, as required by CEQA, project-specific tribal consultation would occur
during the review of any project requiring preparation of an Initial Study. Therefore, the ATP would result in a less-
than-significant impact related to tribal cultural resources.
Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
28
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) c) d) e) The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of
project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially utilize non-potable
and or recycled water during construction, and for potential irrigation. Once the various project components are in
operation, waste water and solid waste generation will be limited mostly to construction activity. Individual projects
would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the
potential utility-related impacts. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding
mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At
such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific
CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals
and policies under the City’s General Plan and other relevant regulatory documents. Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
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:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? 7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
a) b) In 2014, the City adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) to assess hazards and reduce risks prior to a disaster
event and to identify fire high risk and evacuation plans. The proposed ATP will not affect emergency response or propose
structures that will have occupants that could be affected by wildfires. No impact.
c) d) The ATP does recommend Class I shared use paths that may require associated infrastructure. Individual project details
such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately
construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the
implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
29
would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan, the 2014 LHMP and other relevant
regulatory documents. Less than significant impact
Mitigation Measures: None are required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant.
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in the
City of San Luis Obispo. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network
of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City.
Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of
equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are
implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of
the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan and other relevant regulatory
documents. The ATP will be essential in providing guidance to achieve the General Plan mode share goals, CAP GHG levels
and overall goals and policies supported by City planning documents. Less than significant impact.
San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan – Initial Study Negative Declaration
30
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
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 ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in the
City of San Luis Obispo. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network
of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City.
Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of
equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are
implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of
the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan and other relevant regulatory
documents. The ATP will be essential in providing guidance to achieve the General Plan mode share goals, CAP GHG levels
and overall goals and policies supported by City planning documents. In fact, the cumulative impact of all of these projects and
programs is the to reduce overall vehicle miles travels and an increase use for both walking and biking. Less than significant
impact.
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
The ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in the
City of San Luis Obispo. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network
of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the City.
Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of
equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are
implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of
the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the City’s General Plan and other relevant regulatory
documents. The ATP will be essential in providing guidance to achieve the General Plan mode share goals, CAP GHG levels
and overall goals and policies supported by City planning documents. No impact.
31
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.
N/A
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.
N/A
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 Circulation Element, 2015
2. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use, 2014
3. City of San Luis Obispo Housing, 2015
4. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation and Open Space, 2012
5. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation 2001
6. City of San Luis Obispo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2014 City of San Luis Obispo Noise, 1996
7. City of San Luis Obispo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2014
8. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan, 2020
9. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
10. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines
11. City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance
12. Airport Land Use Plan, 2015
13. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/education/geologicmaps/apfaults.php
Attachments
1. San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan
32