Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01-27-2021 PC Agenda Packet - Amended
City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Co mmission Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, January 27, 2021 - AMENDED 6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING TELECONFERENCE Broadcasted via Webinar *The age nda has been amended to continue Item #3 to a date uncertain, as shown in italics on page 3 of this agenda. Based on the threat of COVID-19 as reflected in the Proclamations of Emergency issued by both the Governor of the State of California, the San Luis Obispo County Emergency Services Director and the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as well as the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 issued on March 17, 2020, relating to the convening of public meetings in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of San Luis Obispo will be holding all public meetings via teleconference. There will be no physical location for the Public to view the meeting. Below are instructions on how to view the meeting remotely and how to leave public comment. Additionally, members of the Planning Commission (PC) are allowed to attend the meeting via teleconference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were present. Using the most rapid means of communication available at this time, members of the public are encouraged to participate in PC meetings in the following ways: 1. Remote Viewing - Members of the public who wish to watch the meeting can view: • Televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20 • View a livestream of the meeting on the City’s YouTube channel: http://youtube.slo.city • View the Webinar (recommended for the best viewing quality): ➢ Registration URL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5093096601969723661 ➢ Webinar ID: 679-447-187 ➢ Telephone Attendee: (415) 655-0052; Audio Access Code: 262-062-227 o Note: The City uses GotoWebinar to conduct virtual meetings. Please test your speakers and microphone settings prior to joining the webinar. If you experience audio issues, check out this YouTube tutorial to troubleshoot audio connection issues. 2. Public Comment - The PC will still be accepting public comment for items within their purview. Public comment can be submitted in the following ways: • Mail or Email Public Comment ➢ Received by 3:00 PM on the day of meeting - Can be submitted via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org or U.S. Mail to City Clerk at: 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ➢ Emails sent after 3:00 PM – Can be submitted via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org and will be archived/distributed to members of the Advisory Body the day after the meeting. Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting • Verbal Public Comment ➢ Received by 3:00 PM on the day of the meeting - Call (805) 781-7164; state and spell your name, the agenda item number and leave your comment. The verbal comments must be limited to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded to Advisory Body Members and saved as Agenda Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting. ➢ During the meeting – Members of the public who wish to provide public comment can join the webinar (instructions above). Once you have joined the webinar, please put your name and Item # in the questions box. Your mic will be unmuted once Public Comment is called for the Item and you will have 3 minutes to speak. Planning Commission Agenda for January 27, 2021 Page 2 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hemalata Dandekar ROLL CALL : Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Steve Kahn, Nicholas Quincey, Michelle Shoresman, Mike Wulkan, Vice-Chair Robert Jorgensen, and Chair Hemalata Dandekar CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 9, 2020. PUBLIC COMMENT At this time, people may address the Commission about items not on the agenda. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Commission is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS Note: Any court challenge to the action taken on public hearing items on this agenda may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of San Luis Obispo at, or prior to, the public hearing. If you wish to speak, please give your name and address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes; consultant and project presentations limited to six minutes. 2. Review of a proposed General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and new neighborhood park consisting of nine raised garden planter boxes, open turf space, playground equipment, picnic tables, and associated site improvements including the removal of up to eight trees, the protection of approximately 20 native trees to remain in place, and the planting of 33 new trees. The project includes improvements within the City public right-of-way including: utility connections; 215 linear feet of concrete sidewalk, gutter, and red-painted curb would be constructed along the parcel frontage along Broad Street to the Lincoln Street/Broad S treet intersection; all four corners of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection would be upgraded to provide accessible curb ramps with installation of truncated domes; and two new white high- visibility crosswalks would be installed across Broad Street and Lincoln Street on the western and southern sides (respectively) of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection. The project includes the change to the land use designation of the property from Open Space (OS) to Park (P) and rezoning the property from Conservation Open Space (C/OS-5) to Public Facility (PF), and a vehicle parking reduction by providing 10 additional bicycle parking spaces. The project includes a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (CEQA); Project address: 533 Broad Street; Case #: PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, RZ-0322-2020, EID-0321-2020; Current Zone: C/OS-5, Proposed Zone: PF; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. (Kyle Bell – 60 minutes) Recommendation: Recommend the City Council approve the general plan amendment, rezone, and park application as described in the Draft Resolution and Draft Ordinance and an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. Planning Commission Agenda for January 27, 2021 Page 3 3. Development review of a Common Interest Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM 3136) and the development of 192 residential units, including 7 live-work units, 585 square feet of commercial space, 433 on-site parking spaces, and other residential community amenities on a 10.93-acre site located within the 231-acre Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) area with a request to allow live work units on the ground floor within the first 50 feet of floor area measured from the building face adjacent to a street and review of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); Project addresses: 3580, 3584 & 3590 Bullock Lane, Bullock Ranch; Case #: ARCH-0489- 2019, SBDV-0490-2019, EID-0345-2020; Zones: R-3-SP & C-C-MU; Barry Ephraim with Bullock Ranch LLC owner/applicant. (John Rickenbach – 45 minutes) The applicant has requested to postpone Planning Commission’s review of Bullock Ranch to a date uncertain to have more time to review and understand the conditions of approval required for the project. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 4. Staff Updates & Agenda Forecast ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 10, 2021, at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference. APPEALS Any decision of the Planning Commission is final unless appealed to City Council within 10 days of the action (Recommendations to City Council cannot be appealed since they are not a final action). Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Commission may file an appeal with the City Clerk. Appeal forms are available at the Community Development Department office, City Clerk’s office, or on the City’s website (www.slocity.org). The appropriate appeal fee must accompany the appeal documentation. LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see the Clerk The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Planning Commission regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Planning Commission are available for public inspection on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/advisory-bodies. Meeting video recordings can be found on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/city-clerk/on-demand- meeting-videos City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 99 0 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting Wednesday, December 9, 2020 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday, December 9, 2020 at 6:00 p.m., via teleconference, by Vice-Chair Robert Jorgensen. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Steve Kahn, Nicholas Quincey, Michelle Shoresman, and Vice-Chair Robert Jorgensen Absent: Commissioner Mike Wulkan and Chair Hemalata Dandekar Staff: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney Roy Hanley, and Deputy City Clerk Megan Wilbanks PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None 1.CONSENT AGENDA – CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER QUINCEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAHN, CARRIED 5-0-2 (Commissioner Wulkan and Chair Dandekar absent) to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of November 18, 2020. PUBLIC HEARING 2.Continued review of a mixed-use project consisting of 15 residential units and 1,500 square feet of commercial space within the Commercial Services (C-S) zone. The project includes a density bonus of 20% including a request for an alternative incentive to relax development standards for the creek setback requirement to allow variable 2-8-foot setback for various buildings, where 20 feet is normally required, a request to allow residential uses on the ground floor within the first 50 feet of the structure along the street frontage, and a request for a 10 percent parking reduction. Project is categorically exempt from environmental review (CEQA); Project Address: 830 Orcutt Road; Case #: ARCH-0764-2019, AFFH-0210- 2020, USE-0209-2020; Zone: Commercial Services (C-S) zone; 830 Orcutt, LLC, owner/applicant. Associate Planner Kyle Bell presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries. Item 1 Packet Page 1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2020 Page 2 of 4 Applicant representatives, Bryan Ridley and Charles Ashley, provided an overview of the project. Vice-Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing. Public Comment: None Vice-Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOPKINS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER QUINCEY, CARRIED 5-0-2 (Commissioner Wulkan and Chair Dandekar absent) to adopt a Resolution entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A THREE-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL SERVICES ZONE, CONSISTING OF 15 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 1,500 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A DENSITY BONUS OF 5% INCLUDING A REQUEST FOR AN ALTERNATIVE INCENTIVE TO RELAX DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CREEK SETBACK REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A MINIMUM TWO FOOT SETBACK, WHERE 20 FEET IS NORMALLY REQUIRED, A REQUEST TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET OF THE STRUCTURE ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE, AND A REQUEST FOR A 10 PERCENT PARKING REDUCTION. PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED DECEMBER 9, 2020 (830 ORCUTT ROAD, ARCH-0764-2019, AFFH-0210-2020, & USE-0209-2020)” with the following modification: • Modify Condition No. 19: Designating Unit #9 as the very low-income unit, as it is located on the backside of the project and not facing the street. 3. Public scoping meeting to discuss the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) being prepared for a mixed-use development known as 600 Tank Farm Road Residential Mixed-Use Project located immediately north of Tank Farm Road, near its intersection with Santa Fe Road. The project consists of 280 residential units and 12,500 square feet of commercial space, the project also includes an amendment to the Airport Area Specific Plan to rezone the property from Business Park (BP-SP) to Commercial Services (C-S-SP), and an associated General Plan Map Amendment. Project address: 600 Tank Farm Road; Case #: SPEC-0407-2020 & GENP-0814-2019; Zone: BP-SP; Covelop Holdings, LLC, applicant. Associate Planner Kyle Bell, Contract Project Manager John Rickenbach, and Chris Bersbach with Rincon Consultants presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries. Applicant representative, Stephen Peck, provided a brief overview of the project. Item 1 Packet Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2020 Page 3 of 4 Vice-Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing. Public Comment: None Vice-Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing. ACTION: By consensus, the Commission provided the following comment and recommendation for the preparation of the EIR: • Ensure that the list of environmental issues on Slide #14 of the staff presentation are included in the EIR, in addition to any additional factors identified during the 30-day Public Scoping Period (ends at midnight on December 28, 2020). 4. Review of the City’s Draft Active Transportation Plan that will supersede the 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan as the planning document that provides recommendations for improvements to walking and bicycling in the City. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact pursuant to CEQA is recommended for the project; Project Address: Citywide; Case #: OTHER 0495-2020, EID 0496-2020; Zone: Citywide; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant. Transportation Manager Luke Schwartz and Active Transportation Manager Adam Fukushima presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries. Vice-Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing. Public Comment: Molly Kern Vice-Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOPKINS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAHN, CARRIED 5-0-2 (Commissioner Wulkan and Chair Dandekar absent) to adopt a resolution entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED DECEMBER 9, 2020 (CITYWIDE, OTHER 0495-2020 EID 0496-2020)” Item 1 Packet Page 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 9, 2020 Page 4 of 4 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 5. Agenda Forecast – Principal Planner Tyler Corey provided an update of upcoming projects. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. The next Regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 27, 2021, via teleconference. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/2021 Item 1 Packet Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of a proposed general plan amendment and rezone for a neighborhood park on a 0.9-acre parcel and pedestrian infrastructure improvements within the City right-of-way, including a vehicle parking reduction by providing additional bicycle parking. The project would result in changing the General Plan Designation of the parcel from Open Space (OS) to Park (P) and changing the zoning designation of the parcel from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS-5) to Public Facility (PF). PROJECT ADDRESS: 533 Broad Street BY: Cassidy Williams, Contract Planner VIA: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner Phone: (805) 781-7524 E-mail: kbell@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: PARK-0320-2020, GENP- 0612-2019, EID-0321-2020 FROM: Shawna Scott, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION Recommend the City Council approve the general plan amendment, rezone, and park application as described in the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) and Draft Ordinance (Attachment 2) and an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. SITE DATA SUMMARY The City of San Luis Obispo (City) proposes the conversion of an existing community garden to a neighborhood park on a 0.9-acre parcel, changing the General Plan Designation of the parcel from Open Space (OS) to Park (P), and changing the zoning designation of the parcel from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS-5) to Public Facility (PF). The project parcel is bordered by Old Garden Creek to the west and Stenner Creek to the east and currently supports a community garden with 18 garden plots. The two creeks converge at the southern Applicant City of San Luis Obispo Representative Kyle Bell Zoning Conservation/Open Space (C/OS-5) (minimum parcel size 5 acres) General Plan Open Space (OS) Site Area 0.9 acre Environmental Status An Initial Study has been prepared with a recommendation for a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 2 Time: 60 minutes Item 2 Packet Page 5 PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, EID-0321-2020 North Broad Street Neighborhood Park, General Plan Amendment and Rezone Page 2 corner of the park. The creek banks are steep with fairly dense riparian vegetation including walnut, coast live oak, and arroyo willow trees. The parcel frontage along Broad Street currently supports street parking and a pedestrian entrance apron. The project includes a parking reduction to reduce the required parking by one space by providing additional bicycle parking on-site, resulting in no vehicle parking on-site. The proposed project would facilitate development of a neighborhood park that would include garden planter boxes, open turf space, playground equipment and other appurtenant facilities. 1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW Review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, Community Design Guidelines (CDG), and other applicable City development standards and guidelines and make a recommendation to the City Council. Planning Commission (PC) review is required for projects which include an amendment to the general plan or zoning regulations. 2.0 PROJECT DETAILS The proposed park would include nine raised garden planter boxes with on-site composting facilities, open turf space, playground equipment, a water fountain/water filling station, picnic tables, benches, trash and recycling receptacles, and an accessible walking path around the perimeter of the park. The park would also provide safety features including a pedestrian barrier fence 3.5 feet in height between Broad Street and the frontage of the property as well as a perimeter fence six feet in height to separate the park areas from the creek and associated riparian habitat located on the northern side of the parcel. The project would result in approximately 0.35 acre of site disturbance on the approximately 0.9-acre parcel, including removal of the existing concrete driveway apron on-site, paving of approximately 0.11-acre for walking paths, and removal of up to eight trees on-site. The project would include the protection of approximately 20 native trees on-site to remain in place, and the planting of 33 new trees. The project would include several improvements within the City public right-of-way along Broad Street and Lincoln Street. The project would include improvements to the existing connection to the City water line within the Broad Street public right-of-way. Approximately 215 linear feet of concrete sidewalk, gutter, and red-painted curb would be constructed along the parcel frontage along Broad Street to the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection, to be designed in compliance with applicable City standards and allow for adequate emergency vehicle access. A portion of this area currently contains sections of curb, gutter, and sidewalk which would be removed as a part of the project and replaced by the new sections. All four corners of the Lincoln Street/Broad Str eet intersection would be upgraded to provide accessible curb ramps with installation of truncated domes. Lastly, two new white high-visibility crosswalks would be installed across Broad Street and Lincoln Street on the western and southern sides (respectively) of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection. Construction of the project and associated improvements is anticipated to occur over a six-month period. 3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEWS On September 4, 2019, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) reviewed and discussed the proposed layout for the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park. By consensus, PRC requested staff to return with a modified design and provide a final layout of the proposed park. Recommendations for the final layout included providing a walking path, providing more defined spacing between Item 2 Packet Page 6 PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, EID-0321-2020 North Broad Street Neighborhood Park, General Plan Amendment and Rezone Page 3 garden plots and play areas, removal of the herb labyrinth, incorporation of additional passive recreation area, removal of the shared succulent feature, provision of additional amenities or garden plots, and incorporation of a planting bed of plants native to San Luis Obispo with identification language (Attachment 4, PRC Report and Minutes 9.4.19). On November 6, 2019, the PRC conducted final review of the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park layout and was overall in favor of the design (Attachment 5, PRC Report and Minutes 11.6.19). 4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The proposed improvements must conform to the standards and limitations of the Zoning Regulations and Engineering Standards and be consistent with the applicable policies set forth in the Community Design Guidelines. Staff has evaluated the project’s consistency with relevant requirements and has found it to be in substantial compliance with the only exception regarding the requested parking reduction to reduce the required on-site parking by one space, as discussed in this analysis. 4.1 Consistency with the General Plan The City Parks and Recreation Element identifies the unmet need for a neighborhood park in the Broad Street area near US 101 and establishes a target rate of park development to be 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City has a population of 46,802 in 2019 according to the City General Plan 2019 Annual Report, which would equate to a target of 465.5 acres of parkland. The city currently supports a total of 162.58 acres of parkland. Therefore, this project would contribute to the City goal of achieving its target park ratio and would meet the current need for a neighborhood park in a residential area of the city that does not have access to other public park facilities. The City Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) identifies a goal to achieve and maintain air quality that supports health and enjoyment for those who live, work, and visit the city (Goal 2.1.1) and a policy to promote walking, biking, and use of public transit to reduce dependency on motor vehicles (Policy 2.2.4). The project would result in the improvement of pedestrian infrastructure and establishment of a neighborhood park within an existing residential neighborhood, and within walking and bicycling distance for surrounding residents. Based on the location of the proposed park, provision of new striped crosswalks and other pedestrian infrastructure improvements, and provision of bicycle rack parking on-site, the project would encourage use of alternative transportation modes to and from the park and would likely replace existing vehicle trips to other parks or recreational facilities outside the neighborhood. Therefore, the project would be consistent with Goal 2.1.1 and Policy 2.2.4 of the COSE. City COSE Policy 9.1.1 states that any development that is permitted in natural or agricultural landscapes shall be visually subordinate to and compatible with the landscape features. The project would be consistent with this policy as the mature vegetation and drainages that surround the site would be maintained and no prominent structural features are proposed that would dominate or substantially contrast with the existing natural landscape of the site. The project is consistent with the City Land Use Element Policy 1.8.6 which calls for ensuring continuous wildlife habitat are preserved, because the proposed neighborhood park uses would maintain required setbacks from on-site creek and riparian corridor areas, as well as install fencing between park activity use areas and the riparian corridor. The project has been designed to be consistent with the Park (P) land use designation as detailed in the Land Use Element. Item 2 Packet Page 7 PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, EID-0321-2020 North Broad Street Neighborhood Park, General Plan Amendment and Rezone Page 4 4.2 Consistency with the Zoning Regulations As stated in the City Zoning Regulations, the PF zone is intended to provide for a wide range of public, cultural, and quasi-public uses that meet the needs of the City and County residences. Public uses are those conducted by governmental or nonprofit agencies. The zone is further intended to protect neighboring private uses from potentially incompatible uses. Parking: In accordance with Zoning Regulations Table 3-4 the project requires one vehicle parking space. However, the project proposes a 100% parking reduction, resulting in the provision of zero vehicle parking spaces onsite. The Zoning Regulations Section 17.72.050(C)(3)(a) stipulates that parking may be reduced by one vehicle space for each five bicycle spaces provided in excess of required parking. The project includes 14 bicycle parking spaces where only five spaces would have normally been required. The new neighborhood park would not generate any increase of new vehicle trips than the existing use of the site because the project reduces the number of community garden plots from existing conditions from 18 to 9 and replaces them with other amenities that do not generate any additional parking demand. The park would serve the immediately surrounding residential neighborhoods and provide improved accessible sidewalks that encourage pedestrian and bicycle access. The project would provide park amenities in an area that is currently lacking them and would, therefore, reduce longer trips currently being made to other park facilities in the City. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study (IS) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is recommended for adoption (Attachment 6, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration [SCH #2020120448]). The IS/MND identifies that the project would potentially affect the following environmental factors unless mitigated: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, recreation, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to, implementation of standard construction equipment emission control measures, standard diesel idling control measures, testing and disposal protocol for naturally occurring asbestos, implementation of an odor control plan, nesting bird, monarch butterfly, and roosting bat preconstruction surveys and avoidance protocol, streambed protection measures, erosion control measures, implementation of an Archaeological Monitoring Plan, archaeological resource discovery protocol, and maintenance of construction equipment. A 30-day public review period of the Draft MND began on December 24, 2020 and will end on January 25, 2021. Comments were received from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). DTSC provided comments on general best practices for demolition of existing structures and removal of materials from the site and guidance on handling of any hazardous materials with potential to occur on-site, which has been addressed by mitigation measure AQ-3. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) also provided correspondence stating that they had no comments on the project or the MND. 6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including: Planning, Engineering, Transportation, Building, Utilities, City Arborist, Natural Resources, and Fire. Staff has Item 2 Packet Page 8 PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, EID-0321-2020 North Broad Street Neighborhood Park, General Plan Amendment and Rezone Page 5 not identified any unusual site conditions or circumstances that would require special conditions. Comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as conditions of approval. 7.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES 7.1 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. 7.2 Recommend denial the project. An action recommending denial of the application should include findings that cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, CDG, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents. 8.0 ATTACHMENTS 1.Draft Resolution 2.Draft Ordinance 3.Project Plans 4.PRC Report and Minutes 9.4.2019 5.PRC Report and Minutes 11.6.2019 6.Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration Item 2 Packet Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. PC-XXXX-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK, INLCUDING A PARKING REDUCTION AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE PROJECT INCLUDES CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF THE SITE FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO PARK (P) AND CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE SITE FROM CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE (C/OS-5) TO PUBLIC FACILITY (PF). THE PROJECT INCLUDES A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JANUARY 27, 2021 (533 BROAD STREET, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, AND EID-0321-2020) WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on September 4, 2019, continuing the project with direction for consistency with the Parks and Recreation Element; and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on November 6, 2019, recommending approval of the project with direction to the Planning Commission for consistency with the Parks and Recreation Element; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web based public hearing on January 27, 2021, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under PARK-0320- 2020, GENP-0612-2019, & EID-0321-2020; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve the project (PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, & EID-0321-2020), based on the following findings: 1. As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Item 2 Packet Page 10 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 2 2. The project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, since the proposed design complies with all property development standards including height, setbacks, coverage, floor area ratio, and parking for the Public Facilities zone. 3. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element Policy 1.8.6 which calls for ensuring that continuous wildlife habitats are preserved, because the proposed neighborhood park uses would maintain required setbacks from on-site creek and riparian corridor areas, as well as install fencing between park activity use areas and the riparian corridor. 4. The project is consistent with the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 2.2.4 because the project promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation such as walking and biking through the provision of pedestrian infrastructure improvements and bicycle racks. 5. The project is consistent with the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.1.1 because all proposed structural components would be visually subordinate and compatible with the existing natural landscape features of the project site. 6. The project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for the Public Facility (PF) Zone because the project is consistent with the intended uses to be developed within the PF zone and has been designed in compliance with the applicable development standards. 7. There is no evidence to indicate that granting the parking reduction will result in poor on- site circulation or adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed project complies with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.72.050, because the project provides additional bicycle parking beyond what is required to provide on-site, for a parking reduction at a rate of one vehicle space per five additional bicycle spaces. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council adopt the IS/MND, based on incorporation of the following mitigation measures, which will reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant. Air Quality AQ-1 The following measures shall be implemented to minimize construction-generated emissions. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. Construction of the proposed project shall use low-VOC content paints not exceeding 50 grams per liter. b. To the extent locally available, prefinished building materials or materials that do not require the application of architectural coatings shall be used. Item 2 Packet Page 11 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 3 c.Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. d.Use water trucks, APCD approved dust suppressants (see Section 4.3 in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook), or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the District’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. Please note that since water use is a concern due to drought conditions, the contractor or builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. For a list of suppressants, see Section 4.3 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. e.All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. f.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; g.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. h.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 SLOAPCD. i.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. j.Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. k.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 CVC Section 23114. l.Install wheel washers at the construction site entrance, wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site, or implement other SLOAPCD- approved methods sufficient to minimize the track-out of soil onto paved roadways. m.Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. n.The burning of vegetative material shall be prohibited. Effective February 25, 2000, the APCD prohibited developmental burning of vegetative material within San Luis Obispo County. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. Item 2 Packet Page 12 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 4 o. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. p. When applicable, portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, used during construction activities shall be registered with the California statewide portable equipment registration program (issued by the California Air Resources Board) or be permitted by the APCD. Such equipment may include: power screens, conveyors, internal combustion engines, crushers, portable generators, tub grinders, trammel screens, and portable plants (e.g, aggregate plant, asphalt plant, concrete plant). For more information, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. AQ-2 The following measures shall be implemented to reduce expose of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: b. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, c. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. d. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; e. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non-taxed version suitable for use off-road); f. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; g. Idling of all on and off-road diesel-fueled vehicles shall not be permitted when not in use. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job site to remind drivers and operators of the no idling limitation. h. Electrify equipment when possible; Item 2 Packet Page 13 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 5 i. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, when available; and, j. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site when available, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. AQ-3 Prior to any grading activities a geologic evaluation shall be conducted to determine if naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. These requirements may include but are not limited to: a. Development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan which must be approved by the SLOAPCD before operations begin, and, b. Development and approval of an Asbestos Health and Safety Program (required for some projects). If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules- regulations/asbestos/noa.php. AQ-4 An odor-control plan shall be prepared for the project. The plan shall incorporate odor management practices to reduce odor-generation potential associated with onsite composting activities. Such practices shall include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Composting materials shall be turned on a frequent basis sufficient to maintain proper aeration. b. Moisture content of the composting materials shall be monitored to ensure consistent/proper moisture content. c. Ensure composting materials maintain an adequate mix of brown (e.g., paper) and green material. Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as necessary. Biological Resources BR-1 If tree removal or site disturbance is necessary during the fall and winter monarch butterfly migration (late October through February), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for monarch butterflies that could utilize trees on-site for overwintering. If monarch butterflies are detected in the work area or within 300 feet of the work area, tree removal shall be postponed until after the overwintering period or until a qualified biologist determines monarch butterflies are no longer utilizing the trees on or within 300 feet of the site for overwintering. BR-2 Vegetation removal shall be scheduled to occur outside the nesting bird season (February 15 to September 15), if feasible. If vegetation removal occurs between February 15 and Item 2 Packet Page 14 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 6 September 15, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 2 weeks prior to disturbance to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the disturbance area. If active nests are observed, vegetation removal shall be avoided within 100 feet of active passerine nests and 300 feet of active raptor nests until young birds have fledged and left the nest. The nests shall be monitored weekly by a biologist with experience with nesting birds. The buffer may be reduced if deemed appropriate by the biologist. If any federally or state-listed bird species or California fully protected bird species are observed nesting in or near the project area, the biologist and the City of San Luis Obispo shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife before any disturbances occur within 500 feet of the nest. Readily visible exclusion zones will be established in areas where nests must be avoided. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be contacted if any federally or state-listed bird species are observed during surveys. Bird nests, eggs, or young covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code shall not be moved or disturbed until the end of the nesting season or until young fledge, nor will adult birds be killed, injured, or harassed at any time. Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, nests of raptors (owls, hawks, falcons, eagles) shall not be removed prior to coordination with and approval from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. BR-3 The City of San Luis Obispo shall retain a biologist to conduct roosting bat surveys prior to any tree removal. Pre-disturbance surveys for bats shall include one daytime and one dusk survey no more than 30 days prior to the tree removal to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. The biologist(s) conducting the preconstruction surveys shall identify the nature of the bat utilization of the area (i.e., no roosting, night roost, day roost, maternity roost). If bats are found to be roosting in the trees to be removed, the City of San Luis Obispo shall delay the tree removal until the bats have left the area. BR-4 Removal of the 40-inch diameter at breast height Monterey cypress tree located at the top- of-bank of Old Garden Creek shall be avoided, if feasible. If removal cannot feasibly be avoided, the City shall pursue a Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW prior to removing the tree. The following avoidance and minimization measures are anticipated to be included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement and are therefore incorporated into the proposed project per CEQA. Should any of these measures conflict with the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the Streambed Alteration Agreement shall take precedence over these measures. If any of the following measures are not included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the measures will be required in addition to the measures provided in the Streambed Alteration Agreement. • Tree and vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank shall be prohibited during rain or within 24 hours following significant rainfall. Significant rainfall is defined as rainfall totaling one-half inch (0.5-inch) of rain in any 24-hour period. • All vegetation removal within the top-of-bank shall be conducted during daylight hours. Item 2 Packet Page 15 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 7 •Prior to vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank, the City shall identify the limits of access routes and encroachment into the riparian area to the minimum disturbance required to conduct the vegetation removal. The “work area limits” shall be clearly marked in the field with highly visible flagging or fencing. The flagging or fencing shall be maintained in good repair for the duration of activities occurring in the top-of-bank. All areas beyond the identified work area limits shall be considered Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and shall not be disturbed. •The aquatic areas within the creeks shall be avoided. Project activities within the aquatic portions of the creeks are prohibited. No work within the channel of the creek shall occur. •Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct training sessions to familiarize all construction personal with the project conditions, limits of disturbance, special-status species with potential to occur in the work areas, general provisions and protections afforded by the state and federal endangered species acts, the Clean Water Act, Porter Cologne Water Quality Act, and California Fish and Game Code. •The disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the minimum necessary to complete the project and shall only occur with the defined work areas. The disturbed portions of the stream bank shall be restored to as near their original condition as possible. •Prior to initiation of project activities, all trees to be cut or removed shall be clearly identified and marked to avoid accidentally removing trees that should be avoided. •The City shall document the number and species of all riparian woody-stemmed plants in excess of four (4) inches DBH that are cut, removed, or damaged during project activities within the top-of-bank. Riparian trees and shrubs with a DBH of four inches or greater that are damaged or removed shall be replaced by replanting appropriate native species at a 3:1 ratio (replaced to lost). The replacement trees/shrubs shall be maintained by the City for three years to ensure survival. If any of the replacement trees are lost, the lost trees shall be replaced. •Staging and storage areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricant, and solvents shall be located at least 50-feet from the top-of-bank. All fueling and maintenance of vehicles or other equipment shall be prohibited outside of the designated staging and storage areas. •Upon completion of construction, all disturbed soils shall be stabilized using generally-accepted erosion and sediment control practices such as crimped straw and seeds, jute netting, or other appropriate measures. If any mats or netting are used, said mats or netting shall contain only natural fiber materials. Nylon or other synthetic materials shall not be used in mats or netting. All disturbed areas shall be revegetated with riparian or upland vegetation, as appropriate. •All Project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from the stream and from areas where such materials could be washed into the stream. Item 2 Packet Page 16 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 8 BR-5 Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing), shall be installed to protect those trees identified on the final site plans to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted. Protection measures shall remain in good working order during construction. BR-6 Prior to approval of construction permits, to minimize potential sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek, a sedimentation and erosion control plan shall be prepared that incorporates adequate best management practices to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. At a minimum, straw wattles (or comparably effective devices) shall be placed on the downslope sides of the proposed work which would direct flows into temporary sedimentation basins. During construction/improvements, the applicant shall check and maintain these measures regularly and after all larger storm events. All necessary remedial work and/or repairs shall be done immediately after the need for such work is identified. Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance. Cultural Resources CR-1 Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, an Archaeological Monitoring Plan shall be prepared. The Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A list of personnel involved in the monitoring activities; a. Description of Native American involvement; b. Description of how the monitoring shall occur; c. Description of location and frequency of monitoring (e.g., full time, part time, spot checking); d. Description of what resources are expected to be encountered; e. Description of circumstances that would result in the halting of work at the project site; f. Description of procedures for halting work on the site and notification procedures; g. Description of monitoring reporting procedures; h. Description of notification of local Native American tribes in the event of a discovery; and i. Provide specific, detailed protocols for what to do in the event of the discovery of human remains. CR-2 The applicant shall retain a City-approved archaeologist and local Native American observer to monitor Project-related ground-disturbing activities that have the potential to encounter previously unidentified archaeological resources, as outlined in the Archaeological Monitoring Plan. Archaeological and tribal monitoring may cease only if the City-approved archaeologist determines in coordination with the City Project Manager, Item 2 Packet Page 17 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 9 Community Development Director and the Native American monitor that Project activities do not have the potential to encounter and/or disturb unknown resources. CR-3 Prior to initial ground disturbance activities, the City-approved archaeologist shall conduct a brief construction worker awareness training for all construction personnel, pursuant to the approved Archaeological Monitoring Plan. This training shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: a. A detailed description of the potential types of archaeological resources that could be encountered during project excavations; b. The relevant environmental laws and penalties; c. Best management practices; d. Responsibilities of project personnel; and e. Who to contact in the event of an inadvertent discovery, inclusive of local Native American tribes. CR-4 In the event that historical or archaeological remains are discovered during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and Community Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct an assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. CR-5 In the event that human remains are exposed during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and City Community Development Director shall be notified. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s construction plans. 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. Noise N-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be noted on all plans and implemented throughout the construction period: a. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational. Item 2 Packet Page 18 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 10 b. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise-control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.). Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections. SECTION 3. Action. The project conditions of approval do not include mandatory code requirements. Code compliance will be verified during the plan check process, which may include additional requirements applicable to the project. The Planning Commission (PC) hereby recommends the City Council approve the project with incorporation of the following conditions: Planning Division 1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the Planning Commission (PARK- 0320-2020). A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions and mitigation measures of project approval listed as sheet number 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director, as deemed appropriate. 2. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the location of all required bicycle parking for all intended uses. Sufficient detail shall be provided about the placement and design of bike racks to demonstrate compliance with relevant Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Directors. 3. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric plan, demonstrating compliance with maximum light intensity standards not to exceed a maintained value of 10 foot-candles. The locations of all lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of working drawings. All wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut-sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City’s Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter §17.70.100 of the Zoning Regulations. 4. The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan containing an irrigation system plan with submittal of working drawings for a building permit. The legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. The surfaces and finishes of hardscapes shall be included on the landscaping plan. Item 2 Packet Page 19 Resolution No. PC-XXXX-21 North Broad Park Street Neighborhood Park, PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 Page 11 5. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include elevation and detail drawings of all walls and fences. Fences, walls, and hedges will comply with the development standards described in the Zoning Regulations (§17.70.070 –Fences, Walls, and Hedges). 6. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back-flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community Development Directors. Indemnification 7. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. On motion by Commissioner ___________, seconded by Commissioner _____________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 27th day of January, 2021. _____________________________ Tyler Corey, Secretary Planning Commission Item 2 Packet Page 20 ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2021 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE PROJECT INCLUDES AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM OPEN SPACE (OS) TO PARK (P) AND THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE ASSOCIATED PROPERTY FROM CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE (C/OS-5) TO PUBLIC FACILITY (PF), RESPECTFULLY, INCLUDING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MARCH 2, 2021 (533 BROAD STREET: PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, AND EID- 0321-2020) WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on September 4, 2019, continuing the project with direction for consistency with the Parks and Recreation Element; and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on November 6, 2019, recommending approval of the project with direction that the Planning Commission find the project consistent with the Parks and Recreation Element; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web based public hearing on January 27, 2021, recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Development Review to the City Council pursuant to a proceeding instituted under PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, & EID-0321-2020; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1.As conditioned, the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and will be compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. 2.The project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations, since the proposed building design complies with all property development standards including height, setbacks, coverage, floor Item 2 Packet Page 21 Ordinance No. _____ (2021 Series) Page 2 O ______ area ratio, and parking for the Public Facilities zone. 3. The project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element Policy 1.8.6 which calls for ensuring that continuous wildlife habitats are preserved, because the proposed neighborhood park uses would maintain required setbacks from on-site creek and riparian corridor areas, as well as install fencing between park activity use areas and the riparian corridor. 4. The project is consistent with the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 2.2.4 because the project promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation such as walking and biking through the provision of pedestrian infrastructure improvements and bicycle racks. 5. The project is consistent with the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.1.1 because all proposed structural components would be visually subordinate and compatible with the existing natural landscape features of the project site. 6. The project is consistent with the Zoning Regulations for the Public Facility (PF) Zone because the project is consistent with the intended uses to be developed within the PF zone and has been designed in compliance with the applicable development standards including setbacks, lot coverage, and building height. SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings, Mitigation Measures, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The City Council hereby adopts the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact finding that it adequately identifies the project’s potential significant impacts. SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby approves the application PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019, and EID-0321-2020 and adopts an Ordinance to approve the project, subject to the following conditions. 1. The City’s General Plan Land Use Map shall be updated to recognize the change in Land Use Designation of the property from Open Space (OS) to Park (P), subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director 2. The City’s Zoning Map shall be updated to recognize the change in zoning from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS-5) to Public Facility (PF), subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the city's rules and regulations. It is the city's express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. Item 2 Packet Page 22 Ordinance No. _____ (2021 Series) Page 3 O ______ SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2021, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2021, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ Mayor Heidi Harmon ATTEST: ____________________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ______________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk Item 2 Packet Page 23 Reference Documents:City Standard Specifications - May 2018 EditionCity Engineering Standards - May 2018 Edition1.IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR ORPERMITTEE TO CONTACT "UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OFNORTHERN CALIFORNIA" BY PHONE AT 8-1-1 FORTY-EIGHT (48)HOURS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION FOR LOCATION OFPOWER, TELEPHONE, OIL AND NATURAL GAS UNDERGROUNDFACILITIES. CONTRACTOR OR PERMITTEE SHALL ALSOCONTACT THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY FOR THE LOCATION OFCABLE T.V., WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE OR UNDERGROUNDFACILITIES.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL POSSESS A CLASS _______ LICENSEAT THE TIME OF BID OPENING.index to planssheet no.descriptiongeneral notes:datum:san luis obispo county, californialegend:NORTH BROAD STREETNEIGHBORHOOD PARK1 TITLE SHEET/ VICINITY MAP2 GENERAL NOTES3 TREE PROTECTION NOTES4 LINCOLN & BROAD DEMOLITION PLAN5 PARK DEMOLITION - EROSION CONTROL PLAN6 LINCOLN & BROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN7 PARK GRADING PLAN8 PARK CONSTRUCTION PLAN9 PLAYGROUND PLAN10 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS11 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS12 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN13 PLANTING DETAILS14 IRRIGATION PLAN15 IRRIGATION SHCEUDULE-NOTES16 IRRIGATION DETAILS17 IRRIGATION DETAILS18 SPECIFICATIONS SHEETAPPROVED BYSPECIFICATION NO.DATEofSHEETMatthew A. Horn, City Engineer R.C.E. C63611 Approved Date1812/30/2019#######1FILE NO./LOCATION[MO DAY, YEAR]PROJECT SITELOCATIONItem 2Packet Page 24 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/202Item 2Packet Page 25 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/203Item 2Packet Page 26 GGFC4BROAD STREETLINCOLN STREET190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/20Item 2Packet Page 27 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/205BROAD STREETItem 2Packet Page 28 Item 2Packet Page 29 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/207I HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE CRITERIA OFTHE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPEORDINANCE AND HAVE APPLIED THEM FORTHE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THEGRADING DESIGN PLAN.SEE SHEET SPECIFICATION SHEET 17 FOR ETWU AND MAWACALCULATIONSBROAD STREETItem 2Packet Page 30 NOTE:SEE SHEET 2 FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/208BROAD STREETItem 2Packet Page 31 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/209Item 2Packet Page 32 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2010ANTICIPATED DETAILS:xGARDEN PLOT RAISED PLANTERDETAILSxSHADE SAIL STRUCTUREFOUNDATION DETAILSxFENCING DETAILSxTABLE MOUNTING CONDITIONSDETAILxBENCH MOUNTING CONDITION DETAILxBIKE RACK INSTALLATION DETAILxHYDRATION STATION INSTALLATIONDETAILxSHED FOUNDATION DETAILxLITTLE LIBRARY INSTALLATION DETAILxTURF STONE DETAILxPLAY EQUIPMENT INSTALLATIONDETAILSxSAFETY SURFACING/ DRAINAGEDETAILSItem 2Packet Page 33 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2011CONCRETE EXPANSION/CONTROLCONTROL JOINTEXPANSION JOINT18" CONCRETE MOW STRIP2BEND-A-BOARD PLASTIC 2X4 EDGING3Item 2Packet Page 34 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2011I HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE CRITERIA OFTHE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPEORDINANCE AND HAVE APPLIED THEM FORTHE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THELANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN.DWR MWELO COMPLIANCESEE SPECIFICATION SHEET 18 FOR ETWU AND MAWA CALCULATIONSBROAD STREETItem 2Packet Page 35 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2013NATIVE SHRUB PLANTING1SHRUB PLANTING W/GOPHER BASKET2GROUNDCOVERPLANSECTION VIEW© 3Item 2Packet Page 36 FSCTURFAREATURFBLOCKAREAH20CH20190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2014I HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE CRITERIA OFTHE MODEL WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPEORDINANCE AND HAVE APPLIED THEM FORTHE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THEIRRIGATION DESIGN PLAN.DWR MWELO COMPLIANCESEE SPECIFICATION SHEET 18 FOR ETWU AND MAWA CALCULATIONSBROAD STREETItem 2Packet Page 37 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2015Item 2Packet Page 38 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2016Item 2Packet Page 39 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/20163/4" DRIP VALVE/FILTER/REGULATOR1WIRE BUNDLE JUNCTION BOX2IRRIGATION TRENCHING© 3ZONE CONTROL418" AND 36" ROOT ZONE WATERING SYSTEM5BUBBLER AT TREE WELL6TURF SPRAY MARLEX ASSEMBLY7DRIP AIR RELIEF VALVE IN BOX8NETAFIM TECHLINE FLUSH VALVE9TYPICAL DRIP TUBING10DRIP EMITTER AT 1/4" TUBING11Item 2Packet Page 40 190125CITY SPECIFICATION NO.12/30/2019DATE:PROJECT TITLE:SHEET TITLE:ofSHEET NO.17DESIGNED BY:G. GLANDONDRAWN BY:G. GLANDONCHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION1050 Southwood DriveSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.38637/31/2017Item 2Packet Page 41 CityofSanLuisObispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, ItemNumber Parks and Recreation Commission AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: NORTH BROAD STREET NEIGHBORHOOD PARK Prepared by: Shelsie Kloepper, Engineer III RECOMMENDATION 1. Review and discuss proposed layouts for North Broad Street Neighborhood Park 2. Provide direction to Staff on the preferred draft layout option in order to proceed with final layout preparation. DISCUSSION Background Through the 2017-19 Financial Plan Supplement 2018-19 Adopted Budget, funding was provided for the creation of a new park in the Broad Street area north of Highway 101. Staff was directed by Council to pursue the creation of a park at 533 Broad St, an existing City community garden Broad Street Community Garden). Given the history of the first City owned community garden, garden plots will be incorporated into the elements of the park design. The project scope is to provide a neighborhood park with some play features and gathering spaces. The new park will require access improvements for pedestrians and bicycles such as curb ramp(s) at the Lincoln and Broad intersection. The City hired Cannon to design this neighborhood park. Cannon has created two layout options based on community feedback that need to be reviewed and discussed. Public Outreach The public’s input about its parks and park amenities is a critical foundational step that facilitated by staff for all projects in parks. City staff has conducted three community events to receive input on the project components for the design. All three meetings were noticed by fliers, email list, and social media posts. 1. Neighborhood Outreach at Lincoln Deli. On May 8, 2019, Public Works and Parks and Recreation staff presented four concept boards to the public from the corner of the Lincoln Deli frontage. Over eight hundred (800) notices were mailed to residents surrounding the proposed park location. The four concept boards each focused on a different theme that could be used at the new park. Themes included community, wellness, play, and grow. Over seventy-five (75) community members of all ages provided, through sticker placement, their favorite potential park elements. Staff also invited new ideas and provided comments cards for public input. Meeting Date: September 4, 2019 Item Number:__#2 PACKET PAGE 26 Item 2 Packet Page 42 Title of Report) Page 2 2. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Workshop. The next outreach event was coupled with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Public Workshops held at the Ludwick Center on June 5, 2019. The same four element boards were presented and voted on by the community. The event attracted over 125 community members. 3. Community Workshop Meeting. The third workshop meeting was held at the Ludwick Center on August 28, 2019. At this meeting the community reviewed and commented on the two layouts that will be discussed at the Parks and Recreation Meeting. Proposed Park Layouts The most popular elements from outreach events one (1) and two (2) were used to create two park layouts that were presented at outreach event three (3). These layouts incorporated as many features as possible within the limits of the space. The layouts focused on the most versatile features for all park users. The new park layout will also include frontage improvements and safety features such as a barrier fence between the road and the front of the park. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISION CONSIDERATION / NEXT STEPS The Parks and Recreation Commission purview is to review and make recommendations for changes which could have an impact on the City’s parks and park facilities. Staff will review all feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. This feedback will be used for staff to revise the layouts to meet the desires of the community. The final design layout will be returned to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration and approval. ATTACHMENTS A. North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Layouts PACKET PAGE 27 Item 2 Packet Page 43 PACKET PAGE 28 Item 2 Packet Page 44 PACKET PAGE 29 Item 2 Packet Page 45 PACKET PAGE 30 Item 2 Packet Page 46 CityofSanLuis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission Minutes PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Wednesday, September 4, 2019 5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Parks and Recreation Conference Room 1341 Nipomo Street San Luis Obispo, CA CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Rodney Thurman ROLL CALL: Vice Chair Rodney Thurman, Commissioners Kari Applegate, Keri Schwab, Robert Spector, Adam Stowe, and Andrew Webber ABSENT: NONE PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. Public Comment: Lynn Fuller (SLO Resident): The bridges at Meadow Park need replacement and concerned about trees in Meadow Park that need to be removed due to disease. Craig Kinkade (SLO Resident): The parking lots at Laguna Lake Park need to be addressed as well as the continuous parking by RVs throughout the day and night. Dodie Williams (SLO Resident): Concerned about the transient encampments that occur at and around the Meadow Park Building. Would like to see other problem areas within the park addressed including ADA upgrades to the park, access to the building and additional tree removal due to disease and decay. Willing to provide a tour of the park to any PRC members. Introduction: New Parks and Recreation Director – Greg Avakian (Stanwyck – 5 minutes) Item 2 Packet Page 47 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 2 | Page CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1.Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Committee of August 7, 2019. ACTION: APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR AUGUST 7, 2019. CARRIED 6:0:0:0 to approve the corrected minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body for the regular meeting of 08/07/19 as motioned by Webber and second by Stowe. AYES: APPLEGATE, STOWE, THURMAN, WEBBER, SCHWAB AND SPECTOR NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE CONSENT ITEMS NONE BUSINESS ITEMS 2.Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update (Stanwyck/Scott 1 hour) Recommendation: 1.Receive a presentation and public comment, and review, discuss, and confirm park and facility improvement tiers as presented in Attachment 1 (Park-by-Park Assessment, WRT 2019). 2.Receive a presentation and public comment, and review, discuss, and provide input on Park-by-Park Assessment project list (Attachment 1, Park-by-Park Assessment, WRT 2019) with a focus on Tier 3 Visionary Park Improvements. WRT Consultant John Gibbs provided an overview of the draft park-by-park assessment including site-specific recommendations for existing and planned parks and facilities. Each facility and park were designated one of the following improvement tiers: Tier 1: Critical Improvements – Maintenance: Maintaining existing resources Tier 2: Strategic Park Improvements – Improve of Existing Parks/Facilities: Improving existing resources Tier 3: “Visionary” Park Improvements – New Opportunities: Developing New Amenities Item 2 Packet Page 48 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 3 | Page Based on the assessments completed by WRT consultants, fourteen (14) parks were designated Tier 1, nine (9) parks were designated Tier 2, and seventeen (17) parks were designated Tier 3. Through the presentation, the consultant focused on Tier 3 park locations providing issues, public input and project recommendations for per Tier 3 parks. Input provided during the presentation and based on community feedback and PRC recommendations will be used to refine the list as priorities will be identified for the update to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Element Plan. Public Comment Tim Townley: Need additional field space and turf fields for summer uses including soccer. Would like to see recommendations within the plan for the transient issues addressed throughout the City parks. John McKenzie: Would like to see improvements for dog parks at Laguna Lake Park and asking for the methodology as to why Islay and Laguna Hills Parks were chosen as potential locations for dog parks. Would like to see dog parks included in larger scale park locations including Meadow, Santa Rosa, Emerson and Sinsheimer Parks. Connie Church: Would like to thank the PRC for the dedicated Pickleball courts at French Park. Wants to see additional dedicated pickleball courts at French Park including repurposing the current tennis court for pickleball. Tim Meertens: Supportive of the community outreach for the Master plan process. Would like to see the lights on the Sinsheimer Tennis Courts removed from the project list recommendations and lights incorporated in new tennis court locations at park developments. Does not support the renovation of the Ludwick Community Center but supports building a new recreational facility. Jean Hyduchak: Would like to see additional dedicated courts incorporated into French Park in order to hold Pickleball tournaments – needs a minimum of eight courts. Gary Havas: Supports the idea of two pump track locations and better bike access to Laguna Lake Park Lea Brooks: Supports the pump track options but not near the railroad safety trail and design of pump track needs to be cautiously completed. Would like to see a dog park at Mitchell Park. For Laguna Lake Golf Course, incorporating a multi-use path through the course to connect the neighborhood. Inquiring as to why the Bob Jones bike trail was not included in the assessment and wants the trail to be safe and appealing as possible. Artimiza Shine: Would like to make sure that the “un-homed” population in SLO are addressed properly and considered within the process. Factor how we can address the un- homed community needs when considering park improvements. Item 2 Packet Page 49 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 4 | Page Steve Davis: Missing piece of the assessment is the development of new facilities and amenities with a need to focus on what land acquisition. Address how the City can look at the future need and capture those locations. Looking at the bigger 20-year picture in addition to the park improvements. Mary Vandenberg: The assessment needs to look at the big vision as related to the City and to the SLO Senior Center. Address the additional parking needs for Senior Center members. More focus on Center related improvements with increased offerings of non- active opportunities for older populations. Make sure that the stakeholders are considered with any planning and priorities. Sarah Flickinger: Need to consider the overall need of the community as it grows. Parks should feature community gathering spaces within the city and neighborhood locations. South Higuera corridor needs a new park location with potential for passive recreation. Need additional ADA accessibility within the current park system including passive quiet spaces adjacent to active park spaces. Gathering spaces could create opportunities for multiple generation interconnection. Supportive of the need for fields for non-permitted uses including pick-up games and bike racks near facilities. Plan should provide additional flat roller-skating area for users as roller rink is impacted. Jeff Whitener: The assessment is missing of quantification of what we have versus what we need. Wants focus on the California park standards and where the City stands on meeting the needs. Important to have a comprehensive list which is not currently provided. Kelly Heffernan: Wants more focus on dog parks within the City included in the assessment with more locations highlighted. Commissioner Comment Commissioner Stowe: Make sure Tier 1 and 2 park assessments are addressed. Tier 3 recommendations fall short of expectations and only meet current needs of parks. Vice Chair Thurman: SLO Swim Center and Sinsheimer Park should be listed as a tier 2 given the recommendations. Commissioner Applegate: How are priorities being identified within the park tiers? Commissioner Spector: Consider all Sinsheimer facilities as one – not separate. Broader themes health, safety and security was not addressed over park locations. There needs to be a plan to provide safety for the community when attending parks and programs. Trees need to be addressed due to the declining quantity. Neighborhood needs and standards should be addressed including dog parks within walking distance. Can Mitchel and Emerson parks become active where neighborhoods take ownership of park location? Need more land and facilities address and creative ways to use existing facilities – i.e. parking lot rooftops. Regarding Senior Center – need to offer services for older population. Create and provide standards for all park classifications and programming. Item 2 Packet Page 50 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 5 | Page Commissioner Webber: How are the overlapping needs for other Advisory Bodies within the City be addressed through this process? Vice Chair Thurman: Not proposing new land for development to meet the needs of growing community. Provide a list of areas for potential acquisition. Commissioner Applegate: Laguna Lake Park – how are projects identified including what can fit within the park system. How is this being determined? Commissioner Spector: The big vision for the future (20 years) of Parks and Recreation is missing – nothing aspirational has been provided. Commissioner Stowe: Current parks systems need to be maintained at high level and addressed within list. By consensus, PRC requested staff to return with a list of potential Master Plan and Element Plan update visionary and aspirational projects. Following discussion and agreement on that list” potentially over multiple meetings, review of priorities for ongoing maintenance and deferred maintenance will occur for the inclusion in the Master Plan. 3.North Broad Street Neighborhood Park (Kloepper – 30 minutes) Recommendation: 1.Review and discuss proposed layout for North Broad Street Neighborhood Park 2. Provide direction to staff on the preferred draft layout option in order to proceed with final layout preparation. Staff Kloepper provided a presentation on two proposed layouts for the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park at the corner of Lincoln and Broad, with the design by the consultant group Cannon. The two layouts included project components provided through community feedback at two public workshops held over the summer 2019. Prior to the PRC presentation, staff held a third community workshop receiving feedback on the two concept layouts to provided during the presentation. The layouts focused on versatile features for all park users and will include frontage improvements and safety features such as a barrier fence between the road and front of the park. Community garden plots are incorporated in the design of the park given the history of the community garden location. The Neighborhood park concept layouts did not include a restroom or on-site parking. Commissioner Comment Commissioner Applegate: How many garden plots are currently at the community garden? (18) and how many are proposed (10-15)? Item 2 Packet Page 51 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 6 | Page Vice Chair Thurman: What are the City standards for plot bed (4’x8’). Would like to see raised cement planters within the park and ADA accessible. Offer some separation between play of the park and community garden areas. Shared succulent garden may not be the best use of the area. Of the two, prefer the design of A. Commissioner Spector: Is one layout option more passive than active? (B layout more active). Prefer option B layout due to safety fencing feature and intergenerational activities and the spacing between playground features and plots. Commissioner Applegate: Prefer B layout and incorporate additional garden plots within layout with fencing. Commissioner Stowe: Prefer A. Compost next to shade structure may be an issue regarding potential of smell. Commissioner Webber: Prefer A but would like to see an updated concept without the herb labyrinth. Commissioner Schwab: Prefer B due to fencing. Concerns about the use of labyrinth and if it would be become an unused area. Public Comment Gary Havas: Proposing vertical gardening along fence lines. By consensus, PRC requested staff to return with a modified design and provide final layout. Include walking path with more defined spacing between garden plots and play areas. Removing herb labyrinth and incorporate additional passive recreation area. Remove shared succulent feature and include additional amenities or garden plots. Incorporate a native planting bed of SLO specific plants with identification signage. SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS 4.Subcommittee Liaison Reports (Vice Chair Thurman – 15 minutes) a.Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Spector: Air conditioning units will be installed in Fall 2019. Senior Center held many activities over the summer and partnered with Cuesta for specialty classes. Current programming numbers are strong. Apples and Honey Festival will take place on September 22. Senior Center board finalized policies regarding trips. b.Active Transportation Committee: Commissioner Webber: Working on ATC master plan. Crossover opportunities with master plans. c.City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner Applegate: Item 2 Packet Page 52 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 7 | Page Aquatics The therapy pool is under construction till early October. Aqua aerobics classes will all take place in the large pool during normal business hours. The 40th Anniversary Birthday Splash event on August 9 attracted over 500 attendees to the pool. Building Maintenance installed new LED lights during the maintenance period that will provide additional visibility at night. Facilities Annual Fall maintenance will begin September 16 with the closure of Sinsheimer stadium, then a weekly closure of other city fields. Maintenance will continue through first week of February. Golf Staff continues to address leaks on the course Night Golf begins this month on September 26 and will continue through December, weather permitting New netting is being installed on high impacted holes along the course. Adult Sports Summer softball league has ended. Total of 64 teams were registered Fall Softball is currently underway Youth Sports Junior Giants had a total of 192 registered kids over T-ball and Minors divisions. 25 members of the community volunteered to coach, mentor and umpire the games. Community Services The annual September Scramble will take place Saturday, September 28 at the Laguna Lake Golf Course. Course will feature over 13 obstacles over a .75-mile path throughout the course. d.Jack House Committee: Commissioner Schwab: Jack House met in August and discussed bylaws and will look toward restoration projects for the house. e.Tree Committee: Commissioner Thurman: New supplemental City position has been approved to assist with tree maintenance. There are additional vacancies to be filled. EcoSLO working on a grant project due Spring 2020 with 120 trees in total. f.Youth Sports Association: Commissioner Stowe: No Report. 5.Directors’ Report (Stanwyck - 5 minutes) 1.Youth Services school sites are full and there are vacancies within the division. 2.Johnson Ranch parking area was recently completed over the summer. 3.Pickleball courts are now open at French Park – staff will conduct additional study of unused times. 4.A safety audit was completed of Mitchell Park with trimming taking place on August 28. 5.“See something, Say Something” signage has been added to populated park locations to assist in addressing illegal behaviors. 6.Communication ADJOURNMENT at 8:15 pm Item 2 Packet Page 53 8 | Page Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for September 4, 2019 To the Public Workshop of the Parks and Recreation Committee as approved by the PRC to Wednesday, October 2, 2019, at 5:30 p.m., Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the Parks and Recreation Department at (805) 781-7300 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following web address: http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/fol/61014/Row1.aspx Item 2 Packet Page 54 CityofSanLuisObispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, ItemNumber Parks and Recreation Commission AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: NORTH BROAD STREET NEIGHBORHOOD PARK Prepared by: Shelsie Kloepper, Engineer III RECOMMENDATION 1. Provide final feedback on design layout of the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project. DISCUSSION Background Through the 2017-19 Financial Plan Supplement 2018-19 Adopted Budget, funding was provided for the creation of a new park in the Broad Street area north of Highway 101. Staff was directed by Council to pursue the creation of a park at 533 Broad St, an existing City community garden Broad Street Community Garden). Given the history of the first City owned community garden, garden plots will be incorporated into the elements of the park design. The project scope is to provide a neighborhood park with some play features and gathering spaces. The new park will require access improvements for pedestrians and bicycles such as curb ramp(s) at the Lincoln and Broad intersection. The City hired Cannon to design this neighborhood park. Cannon created conceptual layouts based on community feedback. Public Outreach The public’s input about its parks and park amenities is a critical foundational step that facilitated by staff for all projects in parks. During the conceptual design phase, City staff conducted three community events to receive input on the project components for the design. The community was given an opportunity to comment and provide feedback at the following events: May 8th, 2019: Neighborhood Outreach at Lincoln Deli June 5th, 2019: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Workshop August 28th, 2019: Community Workshop Meeting All three meetings were noticed by fliers, email list, and social media posts. Previous Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting At the September 4th Parks and Recreation Meeting, Staff presented an overview of the public engagement process for the new park at the Broad Street Community Garden (533 Broad). Staff also presented two layout options for the park and received feedback from the commission on Meeting Date: November 6, 2019 Item Number:__# PACKET PAGE 12 Item 2 Packet Page 55 North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Page 2 which elements were preferred on each design. Staff was directed to come up with a revised layout that combined some of the features from each design. The revised layout incorporates a perimeter fence along with an accessible pathway around the entire park. The design also provides more passive play areas and a boundary fence to separate the play areas from the garden areas. The revised design eliminated some unnecessary components such as the herb labyrinth and succulent share to provide more usable open space. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CONSIDERATION / NEXT STEPS The Parks and Recreation Commission purview is to review and make final recommendations for changes which could have an impact on the City’s parks and park facilities. Staff will review all feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. This feedback will be used for staff to complete the design of the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park. ATTACHMENTS Revised North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Layout PACKET PAGE 13 Item 2 Packet Page 56 PACKET PAGE 14 Item 2 Packet Page 57 CityofSanLuis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission Minutes PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Wednesday, November 6, 2019 5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Parks and Recreation Council Chambers 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Rodney Thurman ROLL CALL: Vice Chair Rodney Thurman, Commissioners Kari Applegate, Keri Schwab, Robert Spector, Adam Stowe, and Andrew Webber ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. Public Comment: Sallie Joyce Higgins and Tess Stapleton (SLO Resident): We represent the Central Coast Carousel Committee; our goal is to bring a custom one-of-a-kind carousel to the City of San Luis Obispo. We envision creating a carousel with whimsical animals that represent the Central Coast. We are securing a financial sponsor and would like to inquire if Laguna Lake Park could be a place for the carousel project. Anita Smith (SLO Resident) – On behalf of many tennis players to return the Joanna Santassiere Memorial tennis courts back to the tennis players. We understood that once the pickleball courts were built, the tennis courts would be returned to tennis play. It is very difficult to play on the courts with the multiple striping that was created for the temporary pickleball courts. The other courts in the City are difficult to use during the day, i.e. the high school and Sinsheimer courts. I have a petition with over 100 signatures to return the Joanna Santassiere Memorial tennis courts to tennis only. Submitted petition to staff. Item 2 Packet Page 58 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 2 | Page CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Committee of September 4, 2019. ACTION: APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR SEPTEMBER 4, 2019. CARRIED 6:0:0:0 to approve the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body for the regular meeting of 09/04/19 as motioned by Webber and second by Applegate. AYES: APPLEGATE, STOWE, THURMAN, WEBBER, SCHWAB AND SPECTOR NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE CONSENT ITEMS NONE BUSINESS ITEMS 2. North Broad Street Neighborhood Park (Kloepper – 30 minutes) This is the 3rd revision and combines the comments from the September meeting to formulate a potential final design. The goal is to endorse the design in order to bring Recommendation: 1. Final review of North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Layout; and 2. Provide any additional direction on the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project. Staff Kloepper provided a presentation on the third revision for the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park at the corner of Lincoln and Broad, with the design by the consultant group Cannon. The 3rd revision layout includes the summary of feedback from September 4th meeting to combine the layouts. Staff Kloepper did indicate the parking is only eliminated on one side of Broad Street, which forces safer parking access in the neighborhood. There is currently no lighting at the park, there is power on the street with the potential for future enhancements and the potential for solar lighting in the pathways. Item 2 Packet Page 59 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 3 | Page Public Comment T. Keith Gurnee – (SLO Resident): The Broad street neighborhood is under parked. A few minor recommendations are to monitor the park for a homeless hangout. The biggest issue I have is the lack of parking for the park, with the elimination of parking it will cause cars to only go faster coming off the freeway. I do like the idea of perimeter fencing. Strongly recommend keeping the onsite parking on both sides of Broad Street. Commissioner Comment Commissioner Applegate: Is the parking eliminated on Broad Street. Can you clarify the reasoning behind the freeway onramp/offramp not being closed off. Commissioner Spector: I would like to know the safety zone plan for the park, fencing, cameras and lighting; as needed for all parks. Question for the corn hole court location, is there a reason why the Bocce court was removed. Before this plan is approved I would like to see a comprehensive safety plan that speaks to all these issues. Can you speak to lighting, my concern how this affects a neighborhood park and attracts the unwanted behavior this might bring once it is dark in the park. Vice Chair Thurman: Comment on the planting, I appreciate the drought tolerant and native plants. I am concerned about the purple fountain grass; it does have the potential to be invasive and the park location is near a creek. How many Gingko trees will be planted. Question on the ADA accessible garden plots, the reason for number of plots assigned ADA and the spacing of plots. My preference is for a cemented raised bed option. Commissioner Stowe: Question regarding shade at the picnic table areas. Commissioner Webber: Comment on the ADA garden plots, there are plots that are raised where a wheelchair can slide (roll) under the bed, with drainage in the middle of the bed, so can you come in on both sides, similar to a tabletop. Summary of Commission Comments: We like the overall design. We would like to note security enhancements, lighting, raised ADA garden plots, cemented garden plots, and native plantings only. 3. Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update (Avakian/Scott – 1 hour) Recommendation: Review, discuss, and provide consensus agreement on identified Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project Ideas for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update. Recommended PRC Discussion Items and Action: 1. Review and receive public comment on Draft Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project Ideas. Item 2 Packet Page 60 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 4 | Page 2. Identify any additional ideas, which can be shared with staff prior to or during the public meeting. Are there modifications, deletions, or additions that should be included? 3. Provide consensus agreement on identified Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project Ideas for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update. Staff Senior Planner Shawna Scott provided an overview of the draft themes and strategies, as a context for the draft goals presented tonight: Goal 1: Build Community and Neighborhoods; Goal 2: Sustainability; Goal 3: Safety; Goal 4: Parks, Facilities and Amenities; Goal 5: Fiscal Responsibility. Public Comment Brian O’Kelly (SLO Resident): Representative for the Pickleball community. Today we had 44 people at French Park; playing on tennis courts, people also waiting; we would like you to address pickleball in 20-year plan; For the Master Plan, it is typical to see a pickleball center. We would like to a pickleball center with an additional 8 courts at French Park or another suitable location. Peter Meertens (SLO Resident): Resident of Sinsheimer Park neighborhood and representing the neighbors who oppose the lights at the Sinsheimer Tennis Courts. The high school has built wonderful new tennis courts; please use common sense planning; night time activity at Laguna Lake; think more broadly about lights on the courts; lighting is expensive; I am encouraged about acquiring school district land; school districts provide unique opportunity; communication with school district/facilities. Jeff Whitener (SLO Resident): Process concerns; and question about table; how does this fit into the final document (Master Plan); I was thinking of a more clearly defined document; this seems more out there; is this what final document will look like, or will it be a more direct document; great ideas; needs to be defined better; how are we quantifying our goals; would like to see where we are at as a City meeting recreational goals; types of activities and quantifiable needs (how many courts for example do we need); looking at park standards where are we now and what do we need). Steve Davis (SLO Resident): Looking to the future, I would like something that 10-15 years from now has guidelines for parks and recreation to do things; look at long-term guiding principles; looks at acreage needs; look at what we do not have in the city; how to find land; concern about amount of housing and population base, plus workers, and growth; we need 100’s of acres of land; how to incorporate this much land in the City; need vision in Master Plan to give freedom to do what we need to do. Ed Gravell (SLO Resident): Representative of the Blues and the High School Baseball team. I am surprised to see that there is not much in the presentation for enhancements at Sinsheimer Stadium. The document online, not much in there; call-out (irrigation drainage project); nothing in Community Needs Assessment about facilities; nothing in plan about upgrading facilities and what is going to happen with that property (Sinsheimer) – either attention is given to baseball field or it will be worn out; City has not done much with Item 2 Packet Page 61 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 5 | Page facility; building in really poor shape, does not support needs of community/stadium; working with community, people could get involved to make it a reality. Izzy Ibarra (SLO Resident): I would like to talk about Irish Hills and riding my E bike in the Irish Hills. I would like to inquire why I cannot ride my E bike on the trails. I question that the E bike is damaging the trails more than a regular mountain bike, all it is providing a little more assistance in pedaling on the trails. John Smigelski (SLO Resident): Resident of the Laguna Lake Park neighborhood, I would appreciate more focus on the maintenance of the park and the daily/nightly use by transient behavior in the park. The large development across the street will create new needs for the park and I do not see any futuristic plans for the park that is prioritized. idea for boardwalk/wildlife viewing, not funded anywhere, in existing plan; large development (San Luis Ranch) coming in, how to address their needs; funds coming from San Luis Ranch that should be directed towards Laguna Lake Park; nothing in this plan addresses what the community wants for Laguna Lake Park. Commissioner Comment Vice Chair Thurman: Staff brought a lot of details; jumped over broad picture; we don’t have broad view; it’s too myopic; doesn’t give much latitude; I do believe we need a broad vision of goals; then we can move into the details. The themes are great and the guiding principles, I do have notes on every goal presented. I do question the next steps and how we should move forward with the comments tonight. Quantifiable goals for the acreage over the next 20 years. In general Goals are good, no major issues; wants to share other ideas with staff regarding projects Commissioner Applegate: I appreciate the goals and believe they represent the community feedback. I do want to see Sinsheimer facilities to be added to Goal 5. I also have notes that I will share with staff. Commissioner Spector: We have come a long way; the themes and strategies, core beliefs; not saying things strongly enough; need guiding principles; design excellence = commitment to best practice, highest standards; should be driven by commitment to best practices; and a commitment to health, safety, security; if safety is a core belief, address right up front; reality of future, commitment of collaboration needed for survival; no statements about increasing capacity to keep up with needs; need for quantitative yard stick, how to keep up; no statement here about seniors; mainstreaming seniors; seniors want a senior center that is focal point of aging services; access to range of medical care, services at center; services needing to be accessible, manageable, and affordable; programming needs to look big; need to look at Sinsheimer Park as a totality; not just elements; need a plan for Sinsheimer Park and Laguna Lake Park (look at in totality, including neighbors); both decentralizing and centralizing at the same time; intergenerational neighborhood centers; Emerson amphitheater; create vitality within neighborhood; just say we should have a pickleball center; thinks we are on right track; needs to look at big picture and small picture at the same time as we move forward. I believe the themes/strategies could be bolder that will incorporate more of a best practice, core beliefs and values. I am looking for, here’s where we are now; based on that we want this*; then goals, etc. The Goals make sense; we need more space, needs to be said in Goal strongly that there is a need for more space; say it up front, powerfully. Item 2 Packet Page 62 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 6 | Page Commissioner Stowe: General comment about Goal 5, land acquisition should be the number one priority, critical for plan to succeed. Commissioner Webber: At ATC they were talking about a special kind of fast track; some process that gives PRC ability to fast-track; more to front of line or we can move forward with short term, safety focused projects. 4. Appointment Chair and Vice Chair of Parks and Recreation Commission (Thurman – 10 Minutes) ACTION: APPOINTMENT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. Commissioner Applegate nominates Commissioner Thurman for Chair and Commissioner for Vice Chair Spector. CARRIED 6:0:0:0 to approve the nomination of Commissioner Thurman for Chair and Commissioner Spector for Vice Chair. Motion by Schwab, second by Webber. AYES: APPLEGATE, STOWE, THURMAN, WEBBER, SCHWAB AND SPECTOR NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS 5. Subcommittee Liaison Reports (Vice Chair Thurman – 15 minutes) a. Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Spector: Seniors have a wide range of classes and programming and going on trips and collaborating with other local senior groups. b. Active Transportation Committee: Commissioner Webber: They are progressing with their Master Plan effort and they have a map of potential bike boulevards. I encourage the commission to attend the Active Transportation Committee, it affects pedestrians and cyclists. c. City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner Applegate: Aquatics: Due to staffing shortages and to stay compliant, the SLO Swim Center has offered limited pool access or had to close for Noon lap on multiple occasions over the last couple of months. Parks and Rec is currently working with the Human Resources Department to develop solutions to the staffing issue. Therapy pool opened at the end of September after the re-plastering project. The SLO Swim Center will be received a digital Item 2 Packet Page 63 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 7 | Page ad display. Parks and Rec will be able to feature pool programs, videos and divisional events to the public. Facilities: Jack House Gardens are closed for renovations. Will reopen in April 2020. All fields, excluding Damon-Garcia are now closed for maintenance to reopen in January and February 2020. The bridges in Meadow and Exposition Park will be under construction for replacement starting in December through January. The Meadow Park building will be closed during construction (limited access to facility). Golf: The Volunteer perk program at the Laguna Lake Golf Course has been modified. For completion of the daily checklists, Ball Pickers receive (1) Volunteer Round Card and Marshalls receive (2) Volunteer Round Cards. The cards do not expire and can be utilized by family and friends. Maintenance recently installed sod to the greens on holes 6 and #7 to repair damaged areas. Holes are set to reopen November 12. The excess sod was used to repair the putting greens at the entrance to the course. Night Golf in October had over 50 participants. Night Golf will continue on November 14. Community Services: September Scramble was held on September 28 with over 500 participants. Volunteers from Cal Poly provided assistance with the event. The Boo Bash had over 1000 community members with 500 goodie bags distributed. Great family event with a kid-friendly haunted house and activities. Emerson Park and Santa Rosa Park hosted a City sponsored Food Truck night aimed at activating the park. Attendance was over 100 per event and will become a monthly event within City parks. The Golf Course will host the annual Gobble Wobble on Thanksgiving Day expecting over 500 athletes. d. Jack House Committee: Commissioner Schwab: September meeting planning for Christmas tours, docent trainings and a commemorative plaque for the building and the ADA accessibility. e. Tree Committee: Commissioner Thurman: No meeting in October. Arbor Day event last weekend, Islay Park received 4 new trees. ECOSLO has taken over the California Relief Grant and have planted 17 trees of the 120 needed by next April. f. Youth Sports Association: Commissioner Stowe: YSA met October 16, AYSO, SLO Tigers, SLCOSD…. Will be rewriting their bylaws. 6. Directors’ Report (Avakian - 5 minutes) It has been an amazing first 7 weeks. The night hiking pilot program is in its final year of the two-year program, which began November 3rd. The public art manager worked with local designer iiiDesign for new colorful parking kiosk booths. The Activity Guide for Winter/Spring will be open for registration on December 2nd. City Council approved funding to partner with First 5 for a study session on a County wide study on childcare. Continue work on extension of agreements with our current partners as we move through adoption of the Master Plan. Former Mayor Schwartz passed away a few weeks ago, there will be a celebration of life at the Jack House Gardens on November 30. 7. Communication None Item 2 Packet Page 64 Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes for November 6, 2019 8 | Page ADJOURNMENT at 7:45 pm To the Public Workshop of the Parks and Recreation Committee as approved by the PRC to Wednesday, December 4, 2019, at 5:30 p.m., Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. APPROVED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION: 12/04/2019 The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the Parks and Recreation Department at (805) 781-7300 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following web address: http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/fol/61014/Row1.aspx Item 2 Packet Page 65 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For ER # EID-0321-2020 1. Project Title: North Broad Street Neighborhood Park, General Plan Amendment and Rezone (PARK-0320-2020, GENP-0612-2019) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner 805.781.7524 4. Project Location: The project is located at 533 Broad Street, on the west side of Broad Street between Lincoln Street and the U.S. Highway 101 (US 101) southbound on-ramp/off-ramp intersection with Broad Street within the City of San Luis Obispo (APN 001-181-006). 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 6. General Plan Designations: Existing: Open Space (OS) Proposed: Park (P) 7. Zoning: Existing: Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) Proposed: Public Facility (PF) 8. Description of the Project: The City of San Luis Obispo (City) proposes the conversion of an existing community garden to a neighborhood park on a 0.9-acre parcel, changing the General Plan Designation of the parcel from Open Space (OS) to Park (P), and changing the zoning designation of the parcel from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) to Public Facility (PF). The project parcel currently supports a community garden with 18 garden plots and is bordered by Old Garden Creek to the west and Stenner Creek to the east. The two creeks converge at the southern corner of the park. The creek banks are steep with fairly dense riparian vegetation including walnut, coast live oak, and arroyo willow trees. The parcel frontage along Broad Street currently supports street parking and a pedestrian entrance apron. Item 2 Packet Page 66 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 2 The proposed park would include nine raised garden planter boxes, open turf space, playground equipment, a water fountain/water filling station, picnic tables, benches, trash and recycling receptacles, and an accessible walking path around the perimeter of the park. The park would also include safety features including a pedestrian barrier fence 3.5 feet in height between Broad Street and the frontage of the property as well as a perimeter fence six feet in height to separate the park areas from the creek and associated riparian habitat located on the northern side of the parcel. The project would result in approximately 0.35 acre of site disturbance on the approximately 0.9-acre parcel, including removal of the existing concrete driveway apron on-site, paving of approximately 0.11-acre for walking paths, and removal of up to eight trees on-site. The project would include the protection of approximately 20 native trees on-site to remain in place, and the planting of 33 new trees. The project would include several improvements within the City public right-of-way of Broad Street and Lincoln Street. The project would include improvements to the existing connection to City water system to the existing water line within the Broad Street public right-of-way. Approximately 215 linear feet of concrete sidewalk, gutter, and red-painted curb would be constructed along the parcel frontage along Broad Street to the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection, to be designed in compliance with applicable City standards and allow for adequate emergency vehicle access. A portion of this area currently contains sections of curb, gutter, and sidewalk which would be removed as a part of the project and replaced by the new sections. All four corners of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection would be upgraded to provide accessible curb ramps with installation of truncated domes. Lastly, two new white high-visibility crosswalks would be installed across Broad Street and Lincoln Street on the western and southern sides (respectively) of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection. Construction of the project and associated improvements is anticipated to occur over a six-month period. 9. Project Entitlements: General Plan Map Amendment Rezone Development Review 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The project site is immediately surrounded by Broad Street to the north and Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek on all other sides. The site is generally surrounded by predominantly residential uses to the north, west, and south, with commercial uses at the intersection of Broad Street and Lincoln Street, and by US 101 to the east. 11. 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 sent AB 52 and SB 18 consultation invitation letters to local tribes in the area and has received a response from Patti Dunton of the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties requesting a Phase 1 archaeological survey be conducted. A response was also received from Fred Collins, Spokesperson for the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, who also requested a records search and Phase 1 survey be conducted. A Phase 1 archaeological survey was completed, and copies of the records search and field survey results have been provided to both parties. Representatives from the Salinan Tribe and Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians requested the presence of a Native American monitor during ground disturbance, and to be notified in the event of unanticipated discoveries. These measures has been included as a mitigation requirement (refer to Section 18. Tribal Cultural Resources and Section 5 Cultural Resources). 12. Other public agencies whose approval is required: California Department of Fish and Wildlife SLO County Air Pollution Control District Item 2 Packet Page 67 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 3 Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map. Item 2 Packet Page 68 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 4 Figure 2. Project Location Map. Item 2 Packet Page 69 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 5 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)). Item 2 Packet Page 70 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 6 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. ☐ December 21, 2020 Signature Date Shawna Scott For: Michael Codron, Printed Name Community Development Director Item 2 Packet Page 71 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 7 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 Item 2 Packet Page 72 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 8 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? 1, 2 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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, 4, 5 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The topography of the City of San Luis Obispo (City) is generally defined by several low hills and ridges, such as Righetti Hill, Bishop Peak, and Cerro San Luis—three of the nine peaks known as the Morros—which provide scenic focal points for much of the City. The project vicinity exhibits intermittent views of nearby natural landmarks, including Cerro San Luis. The City General Plan 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 preserving natural and agricultural landscapes. Based on the COSE Scenic Roadways and Vistas Map, the portion of US 101 adjacent to the project site is considered to have moderate scenic value. The project is located within an urbanized area of the City and is generally surrounded by residential and commercial uses to the north, west, and south and by US 101 to the east. The project site currently supports landscaped plantings along the parcel frontage, 18 community garden plots enclosed by open deer fencing, various mature trees, and dense riparian vegetation including walnut, coast live oak, and arroyo willow trees along the banks of Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek which converge at the southwest corner of the parcel. Topography of the project development site is nearly flat to gently sloping. The project site is currently visible from the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection and to viewers travelling along Broad Street from the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection to the US 101 on/off ramps. Views to the project site from US 101 are blocked by existing dense woodland and other vegetation. 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. Based on the City COSE Scenic Roadways and Vistas Map, the project site is not located within a designated scenic vista and none of the surrounding public roadways are designated as having high scenic value. Therefore, potential impacts associated with substantial adverse effects within a scenic vista would be less than significant. b) The project parcel is located adjacent to US 101. Based on the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Scenic Highways online mapping tool, this section of the US 101 is eligible for state scenic highway designation but is not officially desi gnated. Based on the City’s COSE map of scenic roadways and vistas, the project site is not located Item 2 Packet Page 73 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 9 along roadways considered to be of high scenic value or within the cone of view of a scenic roadway. In addition, the project site would not be visible to viewers travelling along US 101 due to existing dense woodland and vegetation that would remain in place upon completion of the proposed project. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial damage to scenic resources within a state or local scenic highway and impacts would be less than significant. c) The project is located within an urbanized area of the City and would include changing the General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcel from Open Space (OS) to Park (P), and changing the zoning of the project parcel from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) to Public Facility (PF). As stated in the City Zoning Regulations, the PF zone is intended to provide for a wide range of public, cultural, and quasi-public uses that meet the needs of the City and County residences. Public uses are those conducted by governmental or nonprofit agencies. The zone is further intended to protect neighboring private uses from potentially incompatible uses. The City Zoning Regulations identify development standards for uses within the PF zone including a maximum building height of 35 feet and a maximum lot coverage of 60%. The project does not include any structures over 35 feet and the two 30-square-foot proposed equipment sheds proposed onsite would account for far less than 60% coverage of the project lot. Therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with PF zoning standards. The project includes conversion of the project site from a community garden to a neighborhood park with play structures, a paved walkway, open picnic tables, open turf spaces, two equipment storage sheds, and nine raised planter boxes. The City COSE Policy 9.1.1 states that any development that is permitted in natural or agricultural landscapes shall be visually subordinate to and compatible with the landscape features. The project would be consistent with this policy as no prominent structural features are proposed that would dominate or substantially contrast with the existing natural landscape of the site, and while the project would result in the removal of eight existing trees on-site, the project includes planting of 33 new trees. Lastly, the project has been designed to be in compliance with the City Community Design Guidelines pertaining to creek side development as the project does not include any improvements within the creek setback area. Therefore, the natural landscape of the site would be maintained, and the project would not result in a conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant. d) The project does not include any new lighting or use of existing lighting on-site. The project does not include the use of any highly reflective or other materials that would have the potential to produce a substantial amount of glare (e.g., solar panels, glass, etc.). Therefore, potential impacts associated with creation of a new source of substantial light or glare would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project is not located within a scenic vista or within the viewshed of a designated scenic highway. The project would be consistent with applicable scenic quality standards set forth in the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element and Community Design Guidelines. No potentially significant impacts associated with aesthetic resources would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 74 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 10 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? 6 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 2, 7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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))? 2, 7 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? 1, 2 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1, 2, 7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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 FMMP (source reference 6). According to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g), forest land is defined as land that can support 10% 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. a) The project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land by the FMMP. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use and no impacts would occur. b) The project site does not include land use designations or zoning for agricultural uses and based on Figure 6 of the City COSE, the project site is not located within or immediately adjacent to land under an active Williamson Act Contract. Item 2 Packet Page 75 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 11 Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract and no impacts would occur. c) The project site is currently zoned Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) and the project includes changing the site zoning to Public Facilities (PF), which would allow for the creation of a public park for the public’s benefit, and the City’s management of the area for wildlife and recreation. Therefore, impacts associated with conflicts with forest land zoning would not occur. d) The project site currently supports numerous planted or naturalized non-native trees including Australian cheesewood (Pittisporum undulatum), walnut (Juglans hindsii x regia), Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa), and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.). In addition to the naturalized trees, a coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) is adjacent to the existing garden beds. The creek banks are steep with a clearly defined top-of-bank along the borders of the park area. The riparian vegetation is largely confined within the banks of the creeks and is a mix of non-native and native trees with a weedy understory. The project would result in the removal of eight trees onsite and the planting of 33 new trees onsite. Riparian habitat would be avoided and preserved onsite and protected with proposed perimeter fencing around the park. Therefore, potential impacts associated with loss of forest land or conversion of forest land would be less than significant. e) The project includes conversion of the project site from a community garden to a neighborhood park with play structures, a paved walkway, open picnic tables, open turf spaces, two equipment storage sheds, and nine raised planter boxes. The project is not located adjacent to or in close proximity to any active agriculture-zoned lands or agricultural uses. Therefore, potential impacts associated with other changes that could result in conversion of Farmland or forest land would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project site is located in an urbanized area and is not within or adjacent to Prime Farmland, land zoned for agricultural or forest land use, or land under a Williamson Act Contract. No potentially significant impacts to agriculture or forest land would occur, and no mitigation is necessary. 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? 9, 10 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 9, 11 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ h) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 1, 8, 9, 12 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ i) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? 9 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 76 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 12 Evaluation The City is located within the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), which also includes Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as partial nonattainment for federal ambient standards for ground-level ozone, nonattainment for the state standards for ground-level ozone, and nonattainment for the state standards for particulate matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter (PM10) (source reference 9). The City COSE identifies goals and policies to achieve and maintain air quality that supports 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 encouraging walking, biking, and public transit use. The SLOAPCD is required to develop a plan to achieve and maintain the state ozone standard by the earliest practicable date. The SLOAPCD’s 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) addresses the attainment and maintenance of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The CAP was adopted by the SLOAPCD on March 26, 2002. The CAP outlines the District's strategies to reduce ozone-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOX) from a wide variety of sources. The CAP includes a stationary-source control program, which includes control measures for permitted stationary sources; as well as transportation and land use management strategies to reduce motor vehicle emissions and use. The stationary- source control program is administered by SLOAPCD. Transportation and land use control measures are implemented at the local or regional level, by promoting and facilitating the use of alternative transportation options, increased pedestrian access and accessibility to community services and local destinations, reductions in vehicle miles traveled, and promotion of congestion management efforts. In addition, local jurisdictions also prepare population forecasts, which are used by SLOAPCD to forecast population-related emissions and air quality attainment, including those contained in the CAP. The SLOAPCD has developed a CEQA Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated with a November 2017 Clarification Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts such as long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to reach acceptable air quality levels, and determine if potentially significant impacts could result from a project. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the activities involved. The CARB has identified the following groups who are 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 receptor locations, including residential dwelling units, some of which are located within 50 feet of proposed work areas. 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 Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 93105). The SLOAPCD Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for NOA to occur (source reference 8). a) According to the SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (2012), a consistency analysis with the Clean Air Plan is required for a program-level environmental review, and may be necessary for a larger project-level environmental review, depending on the project being considered. Project-Level environmental reviews which may require consistency analysis with the CAP include: large residential developments and large commercial/industrial developments. For such projects, evaluation of consistency is based on a comparison of the proposed project with the land use and transportation control measures and strategies outlined in the CAP. If the project is consistent with these measures, the project is considered consistent with the CAP. The project includes construction of a neighborhood park on a 0.9-acre site within an existing residential neighborhood, and within walking and bicycling distance for residents. The proposed project is not considered a large development project that would have the potential to result in a substantial increase in population, or employment. Therefore, potential impacts associated with a conflict with or obstruction of an applicable air quality plan would be less than significant. Item 2 Packet Page 77 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 13 b) San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as non-attainment for ozone and PM10 under state ambient air quality standards. Short-term Construction Emissions The construction of the proposed project would result in the temporary generation of emissions associated with site grading and excavation, paving, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, as well as the movement of construction equipment on unpaved surfaces. Short-term construction emissions would result in increased emissions of ozone-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOX) and emissions of PM. Emissions of ozone-precursors would result from the operation of on- and off-road motorized vehicles and equipment. Emissions associated with construction of proposed project were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, version 2016.3.2). The project is anticipated to result the disturbance of approximately 0.35 acres including approximately 0.11 acres to be paved and materials would be balanced on site. Estimated daily and quarterly emissions associated with initial construction of the proposed project are presented in Table 1, below. Table 1. Projected Construction Emissions Air Quality Pollutant(s) Maximum Daily Emissions SLOAPCD Daily Emission Threshold Maximum Quarterly Emissions SLOAPCD Quarterly Threshold Exceed SLOACPD Thresholds? Ozone Precursors (ROG + NOx) 20.6 lbs 137 lbs 0.5 tons 2.5 tons No Fugitive Dust (PM10) 1.0 lb 7.0 lbs 0.04 tons 2.5 tons No Estimated construction emissions would not exceed SLOAPCD’s significance thresholds. However, if uncontrolled, fugitive dust generated during construction may result in localized pollutant concentrations that could exceed ambient air quality standards and result in increased nuisance concerns to nearby land uses. Mitigation measure AQ-1 has been identified to require the project incorporate standard fugitive dust control measures to reduce localized project fugitive dust emissions to levels that would not exceed ambient air quality standards. Long-term Operational Emissions Long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project would be predominantly associated with mobile sources. To a lesser extent, emissions associated with area sources, such as landscape maintenance activities, as well as use of electricity and natural gas would also contribute to increased operational emissions. Long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants associated with the proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod. The CalEEMod program includes quantification of emissions from various emission sources, including energy use, area sources, and motor vehicle trips. Waste-generation, water use, landscape maintenance activities, and vehicle trip-generation rates were based on the default rates contained in the model. Operational emissions are summarized in Table 2, below. Item 2 Packet Page 78 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 14 Table 2. Projected Operational Emissions Air Quality Pollutant(s) Maximum Daily Emissions SLOAPCD Daily Emission Threshold Total Annual Operational Emissions SLOAPCD Annual Emission Threshold Exceed SLOAPCD Thresholds? Ozone Precursors (ROG + NOx) 0.2 lbs 25 lbs 0.01 tons 25 tons No Carbon Monoxide (CO) 0.4 lbs 550 0.02 tons -- No Fugitive Dust (PM10) 0.1 lbs 25 lbs <0.01 tons 25 tons No Operational emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed SLOAPCD significance thresholds. Based on the analysis provided above, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c) The project site is located within 1,000 feet of multiple sensitive receptor locations, including residential dwelling units, some of which are located within 50 feet of proposed work areas. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the generation of fugitive PM and other pollutant emissions during construction. Fugitive PM emissions would be primarily associated with earth-moving and material handling activities, as well as vehicle travel on unpaved and paved surfaces. Onsite off-road equipment and trucks would also result in short-term emissions of diesel-exhaust PM (DPM). If uncontrolled, localized concentrations of PM could result in increased nuisance impacts to nearby land uses and receptors. Mitigation measure AQ-1 and AQ-2 have been identified to reduce exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations to less than significant. Project construction would not require the demolition of existing large or permanent structures. The project site includes some smaller structures, such as existing garden planters, that would be anticipated to be removed during project construction. However, no existing structures were identified at the project site that would be anticipated to contain asbestos or lead-based paint. The project would include establishment of a public neighborhood park within close proximity to US 101. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with more than 45 million people in the U.S. living within 300 feet of a major transportation facility or infrastructure, there is concern regarding the potential health impacts from air pollutants emitted from cars, trucks, and other vehicles. To address this potential issue, City staff consulted directly with SLOAPCD for guidance and recommendations. Based on this consultation, SLOAPCD determined that preparation of a health risk assessment (HRA) was not required under CEQA based on the finding that the evaluation would address potential impacts of the environment on the project, instead of impacts of the project on the environment. In addition, the proposed neighborhood park would be used on an intermittent and temporary basis, where park users would stay for approximately a few hours or less. Adverse health effects based on proximity to busy roadways are typically considerable due to prolonged exposure due to location of a proximate permanent use, such as a residence. Therefore, potential impacts associated with location of the neighborhood park in proximity to US 101 would be less than significant. Based on a review of the SLOAPCD’s map depicting potential areas of naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), the project site is located in an area that has been identified as having a potential for NOA. Mitigation measure AQ-3 has been identified to require a geologic evaluation be conducted prior to project earthwork to determine whether NOA is present onsite and to implement an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan per the City’s review and approval if present. Therefore, with implementation of measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, potential impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations would be less than significant with mitigation. d) Construction of the proposed project would involve the use of a variety of gasoline or diesel-powered equipment that would emit exhaust fumes. Exhaust fumes, particularly diesel-exhaust, may be considered objectionable by some people. In addition, pavement coatings and architectural coatings used during project construction would also emit temporary odors. Construction-generated emissions would occur intermittently throughout the workday and would dissipate rapidly with Item 2 Packet Page 79 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 15 increasing distance from the source. As a result, short-term construction activities would not expose a substantial number of people to frequent odorous emissions. During operation, the project would include onsite composting or organic waste. Composting is an aerobic biological process in which microorganisms decompose organic materials, such as garden waste, into a compost that can be used as a soil amendment. If aerobic conditions are not maintained, anaerobic decomposition may occur. Anaerobic decomposition may result in localized increases in odors which could be detectable at nearby land uses. Mitigation measure AQ-4 has been identified to require the preparation and implementation of an odor control plan to ensure composting activities are sufficiently maintained. Therefore, potential impacts associated with other emissions, such as odors, would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 The following measures shall be implemented to minimize construction-generated emissions. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. Construction of the proposed project shall use low-VOC content paints not exceeding 50 grams per liter. b. To the extent locally available, prefinished building materials or materials that do not require the application of architectural coatings shall be used. c. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. d. Use water trucks, APCD approved dust suppressants (see Section 4.3 in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook), or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the District’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. Please note that since water use is a concern due to drought conditions, the contractor or builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. For a list of suppressants, see Section 4.3 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. e. All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. f. 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; g. 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. h. 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 SLOAPCD. i. 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. j. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. k. 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 CVC Section 23114. Item 2 Packet Page 80 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 16 l. Install wheel washers at the construction site entrance, wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site, or implement other SLOAPCD-approved methods sufficient to minimize the track-out of soil onto paved roadways. m. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. n. The burning of vegetative material shall be prohibited. Effective February 25, 2000, the APCD prohibited developmental burning of vegetative material within San Luis Obispo County. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. o. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. p. When applicable, portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, used during construction activities shall be registered with the California statewide portable equipment registration program (issued by the California Air Resources Board) or be permitted by the APCD. Such equipment may include: power screens, conveyors, internal combustion engines, crushers, portable generators, tub grinders, trammel screens, and portable plants (e.g, aggregate plant, asphalt plant, concrete plant). For more information, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. AQ-2 The following measures shall be implemented to reduce expose of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: b. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, c. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than five minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. d. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; e. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non- taxed version suitable for use off-road); f. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; g. Idling of all on and off-road diesel-fueled vehicles shall not be permitted when not in use. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job site to remind drivers and operators of the no idling limitation. h. Electrify equipment when possible; i. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, when available; and, Item 2 Packet Page 81 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 17 j. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site when available, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. AQ-3 Prior to any grading activities a geologic evaluation shall be conducted to determine if naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. These requirements may include but are not limited to: a. Development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan which must be approved by the SLOAPCD before operations begin, and, b. Development and approval of an Asbestos Health and Safety Program (required for some projects). If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos/noa.php. AQ-4 An odor-control plan shall be prepared for the project. The plan shall incorporate odor management practices to reduce odor-generation potential associated with onsite composting activities. Such practices shall include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Composting materials shall be turned on a frequent basis sufficient to maintain proper aeration. b. Moisture content of the composting materials shall be monitored to ensure consistent/proper moisture content. c. Ensure composting materials maintain an adequate mix of brown (e.g., paper) and green material. Conclusion The project would not result in a conflict with the local Clean Air Plan and with mitigation, project construction and operation emissions would not exceed applicable SLOAPCD significance thresholds. The project has the potential to expose nearby sensitive receptors to locally concentrated air pollutant emissions. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, residual impacts associated with air quality would be less than significant. 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? 1, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ 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? 1, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ 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? 1, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 82 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 18 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? 1, 13, 14 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 2, 13, 15, 45 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ 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? 2, 13 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Evaluation The following discussion and analysis is largely based on the Biological Resources Technical Memorandum for the North Broad Park and Rezone Project (source reference 13). The proposed park would consist of an approximately 0.5-acre area of relatively flat land with an elevation of 200 feet above mean sea level. The park is bordered by Old Garden Creek to the west and Stenner Creek to the east, and the two creeks converge at the southern corner of the park. The proposed park area includes the flat terrace between and above the banks of the two creeks. Most of the park area includes community garden beds and pathways between the beds. Portions of the park that do not include beds or pathways consist of ruderal vegetation dominated by non-native annual grasses and forbs including ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), slender wild oats (Avena barbata), bull mallow (Malva nicaeensis), and bur chervil (Anthriscus Sylvestris), among others. The park supports numerous planted or naturalized non-native trees including Australian cheesewood (Pittisporum undulatum), walnut (Juglans hindsii x regia), Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa), and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.). In addition to the naturalized trees, a coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) is adjacent to the garden beds. An SWCA biologist conducted two biological surveys at the park on March 31 and April 28, 2020. The purpose of the surveys was to map the existing vegetative communities; conduct reconnaissance flora and fauna surveys; assess the park’s potential to support rare, endangered, or otherwise sensitive biological resources; and investigate the presence of potentially jurisdictional water features. Prior to biological surveys conducted on-site, a literature review was conducted that included the search of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) data output for the property vicinity and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5 data output that focused on the San Luis Obispo and Pismo, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps. a) Special-Status Plants Based on the CNDDB, California Native Plant Society (CNPS), and USFWS IPaC records searches; literature review; and field surveys of the area, 47 special-status plant species were evaluated for potential occurrence within the project site. Due to the ongoing disturbance in the site associated with current uses as a community garden, it was determined that the site does not support suitable conditions for special-status plant species. No special-status plant species were observed within or directly adjacent to the site during surveys conducted in March and April 2020 and the timing of the surveys was such that most target plant species would be in their blooming period. Therefore, potential impacts to special-status plants would not occur. Special-Status Wildlife The literature review identified 37 special-status wildlife species that have documented occurrences in the queried quadrangle maps or were included on the IPaC list. The existing conditions in the park were determined to provide suitable conditions for seven of the reviewed species. Those wildlife species warranting specific consideration while planning the project are listed in Table 3 below. Item 2 Packet Page 83 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 19 Table 3. Special-Status Wildlife with Potential to Occur in or near the Project Site Species Location of Suitable Habitat Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) The trees in the park and the adjacent riparian area could support over- wintering monarch butterflies. Western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) The riparian trees support marginal habitat for this species. White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) The riparian trees support marginal habitat for this species. Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) The riparian trees support marginal habitat for this species. Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) The trees in the park and the adjacent riparian area could provide roosting bat habitat. Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis) The trees in the park and the adjacent riparian area could provide roosting bat habitat. Monarch butterfly The trees in the park and in the riparian corridor adjacent to the park could support overwintering habitat for monarch butterfly. If monarchs are overwintering in a tree to be removed, the monarchs could be directly impacted by the tree removal. Mitigation measure BIO-1 has been identified to require a preconstruction survey for monarch butterflies if tree removal is scheduled during the fall or winter monarch butterfly migration season. If monarch butterflies are detected in the work area or within 300 feet of the work area, tree removal shall be postponed until a qualified biologist determines monarch butterflies are no longer utilizing the trees or within 300 feet of the work site for overwintering. Upon implementation of BIO-1, potential impacts to monarch butterfly would be less than significant. Nesting Birds The trees and vegetation in and adjacent to the park support suitable habitat for special status birds and nesting birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). If vegetation removal occurs during the nesting bird season (February 15 through September 15), the vegetation removal has the potential to impact nesting birds. Direct impacts to nesting birds may include physical removal of active nests resulting in the destruction of the nest, eggs, and/or chicks. Indirect impacts could result from noise disturbance that may prompt an adult bird to abandon the nest. Mitigation measure BIO-2 has been identified to require vegetation removal be scheduled outside of the nesting bird season. If vegetation removal must occur within the nesting bird season, a preconstruction survey shall be conducted to determine the presence/absence of nesting birds within the disturbance areas. If active nests are observed within proximity to proposed vegetation removal activities, no vegetation removal shall occur within the appropriate buffer based on the type of bird nest until young birds have fledged and left the nest. Upon implementation of BIO-2, potential impacts to special status birds and nesting birds protected under the MBTA would be less than significant. Roosting Bats Roosting bats are protected under CEQA; CDFW is responsible for administering CEQA relative to roosting bats. The trees in and adjacent to the park have the potential to support roosting bats. If the trees are removed while bats are roosting in the trees, the bats could be wounded or killed. Mitigation measure BIO-3 has been identified to require preconstruction surveys prior to scheduled tree removal to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. If bats are found to be roosting in the trees to be removed, tree removal shall be delayed until the bats have left the area. Upon impl ementation of BIO-3, potential impacts to roosting bats would be less than significant. Based on the discussion and analysis provided above, the project’s potential impacts to special-status wildlife species would be less than significant with mitigation. Item 2 Packet Page 84 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 20 b) The project development site is bordered by Old Garden Creek to the west and Stenner Creek to the east, and the two creeks converge at the southern corner of the site. The riparian vegetation of these creeks is largely confined within the banks of the creeks and is a mix of non-native and native trees with a weedy understory. No other sensitive natural communities are located within proximity to the project site. As proposed, the project would result in temporary impacts to onsite riparian habitat through the removal of six trees located within 20 feet of the creek banks onsite, including a planted Monterey cypress tree (stump to remain), three Victorian box trees, one willow tree, and one eucalyptus tree, as well as planting of 10 trees and various native shrubs within 20 feet of the creek banks onsite, including coast live oak, big leaf maple, and pacific madrone. The Monterey cypress tree proposed for removal is located at the top-of-bank and contributes to the riparian canopy of Old Garden Creek. Removal of the tree would change the bank of the creek. In addition, the tree contributes shade to the creek. Mitigation measure BIO-4 has been identified to avoid removal of this Monterey cypress tree if feasible, and if removal must occur, a Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW shall be secured prior to removal. The proposed vegetation removal and planting would have the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation as well as disturbance of existing native trees and vegetation that are not proposed for removal. Mitigation measures BR-5 and BR- 6 have been identified to reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat through protection of existing riparian trees not proposed for removal, and implementation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Ongoing operations and use of the proposed park facilities would not affect on-site riparian and creek habitats. Park use areas and the riparian creek habitat areas would be separated by proposed fencing to avoid impacts associated with litter, foot traffic, pets, etc. and the project does not include any new lighting. Therefore, with implementation of measures BR- 4 through BR-6, potential impacts associated with substantial adverse effects on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community would be less than significant with mitigation. c) The proposed project does not include any work or improvements within the onsite creek banks or ordinary high water mark (OHWM). However, the proposed vegetation removal and planting would have the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Mitigation measures BR-5 and BR-6 have been identified to reduce potential impacts associated with erosion and sedimentation through protection of existing riparian trees not proposed for removal, and implementation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Therefore, project impacts associated with state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means would be less than significant with mitigation. d) The project would not result in any direct impacts to on-site creeks that would have the potential to impact migratory fish or wildlife, if present. The project site is generally surrounded by urban development uses and roadways, including US 101. The California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project was queried for Essential Habitat Connectivity, which is the best available data describing important areas for maintaining connectivity between large blocks of land for wildlife corridor purposes. These important areas are referred to as Essential Connectivity Areas (ECAs). ECAs are only intended to be a broad-scale representation of areas that provide essential connectivity. The project site is not identified as within an ECA. The adjacent creek corridors will be avoided and protected throughout project construction and operation. Indirect impacts to the streambed channel, such as erosion and sedimentation during earthmoving activities, could alter the streambed in a way that would adversely affect migratory or resident fish movement. Mitigation measures BR-5 and BR- 6 have been identified to reduce potential impacts associated with erosion and sedimentation through protection of existing riparian trees not proposed for removal, and implementation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Therefore, impacts associated with interfering with movement of resident or migratory fish and/or wildlife would be less than significant with mitigation. e) Based on the City’s Heritage Tree Map, no heritage trees are located within the project site. Proposed tree removal would be conducted in compliance with the City’s Tree Ordinance standards for tree removal, subject to review and approval by the City Arborist. Based on review of the project by the City Arborist, the tree removals are supported based on the existing health of the trees and the promotion of good arboricultural practices by allowing the canopies of existing natives and newly planted trees to fill space. As required by the City Tree Regulations (Municipal Code Chapter 12.24), the City will implement appropriate pruning and tree protection measures for existing trees to be retained. The City COSE identifies Item 2 Packet Page 85 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 21 several policies associated with the protection of special status species and preservation of their natural habitats. Mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-3 have been identified to reduce potential impacts to special-status species and their habitats to less than significant. Therefore, potential impacts associated with conflicts with local policies or ordinances established to protect biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation. f) The project site is not located within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures BR-1 If tree removal or site disturbance is necessary during the fall and winter monarch butterfly migration (late October through February), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for monarch butterflies that could utilize trees on-site for overwintering. If monarch butterflies are detected in the work area or within 300 feet of the work area, tree removal shall be postponed until after the overwintering period or until a qualified biologist determines monarch butterflies are no longer utilizing the trees on or within 300 feet of the site for overwintering. BR-2 Vegetation removal shall be scheduled to occur outside the nesting bird season (February 15 to September 15), if feasible. If vegetation removal occurs between February 15 and September 15, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 2 weeks prior to disturbance to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the disturbance area. If active nests are observed, vegetation removal shall be avoided within 100 feet of active passerine nests and 300 feet of active raptor nests until young birds have fledged and left the nest. The nests shall be monitored weekly by a biologist with experience with nesting birds. The buffer may be reduced if deemed appropriate by the biologist. If any federally or state-listed bird species or California fully protected bird species are observed nesting in or near the project area, the biologist and the City of San Luis Obispo shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife before any disturbances occur within 500 feet of the nest. Readily visible exclusion zones will be established in areas where nests must be avoided. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be contacted if any federally or state-listed bird species are observed during surveys. Bird nests, eggs, or young covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code shall not be moved or disturbed until the end of the nesting season or until young fledge, nor will adult birds be killed, injured, or harassed at any time. Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, nests of raptors (owls, hawks, falcons, eagles) shall not be removed prior to coordination with and approval from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. BR-3 The City of San Luis Obispo shall retain a biologist to conduct roosting bat surveys prior to any tree removal. Pre- disturbance surveys for bats shall include one daytime and one dusk survey no more than 30 days prior to the tree removal to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. The biologist(s) conducting the preconstruction surveys shall identify the nature of the bat utilization of the area (i.e., no roosting, night roost, day roost, maternity roost). If bats are found to be roosting in the trees to be removed, the City of San Luis Obispo shall delay the tree removal until the bats have left the area. BR-4 Removal of the 40-inch diameter at breast height Monterey cypress tree located at the top-of-bank of Old Garden Creek shall be avoided, if feasible. If removal cannot feasibly be avoided, the City shall pursue a Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW prior to removing the tree. The following avoidance and minimization measures are anticipated to be included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement and are therefore incorporated into the proposed project per CEQA. Should any of these measures conflict with the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the Streambed Alteration Agreement shall take precedence over these measures. If any of the following measures are not included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the measures will be required in addition to the measures provided in the Streambed Alteration Agreement. Tree and vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank shall be prohibited during rain or within 24 hours following significant rainfall. Significant rainfall is defined as rainfall totaling one-half inch (0.5-inch) of rain in any 24-hour period. All vegetation removal within the top-of-bank shall be conducted during daylight hours. Item 2 Packet Page 86 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 22 Prior to vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank, the City shall identify the limits of access routes and encroachment into the riparian area to the minimum disturbance required to conduct the vegetation removal. The “work area limits” shall be clearly marked in the field with highly visible flagging or fencing. The flagging or fencing shall be maintained in good repair for the duration of activities occurring in the top-of-bank. All areas beyond the identified work area limits shall be considered Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and shall not be disturbed. The aquatic areas within the creeks shall be avoided. Project activities within the aquatic portions of the creeks are prohibited. No work within the channel of the creek shall occur. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct training sessions to familiarize all construction personal with the project conditions, limits of disturbance, special-status species with potential to occur in the work areas, general provisions and protections afforded by the state and federal endangered species acts, the Clean Water Act, Porter Cologne Water Quality Act, and California Fish and Game Code. The disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the minimum necessary to complete the project and shall only occur with the defined work areas. The disturbed portions of the stream bank shall be restored to as near their original condition as possible. Prior to initiation of project activities, all trees to be cut or removed shall be clearly identified and marked to avoid accidentally removing trees that should be avoided. The City shall document the number and species of all riparian woody-stemmed plants in excess of four (4) inches DBH that are cut, removed, or damaged during project activities within the top-of-bank. Riparian trees and shrubs with a DBH of four inches or greater that are damaged or removed shall be replaced by replanting appropriate native species at a 3:1 ratio (replaced to lost). The replacement trees/shrubs shall be maintained by the City for three years to ensure survival. If any of the replacement trees are lost, the lost trees shall be replaced. Staging and storage areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricant, and solvents shall be located at least 50- feet from the top-of-bank. All fueling and maintenance of vehicles or other equipment shall be prohibited outside of the designated staging and storage areas. Upon completion of construction, all disturbed soils shall be stabilized using generally-accepted erosion and sediment control practices such as crimped straw and seeds, jute netting, or other appropriate measures. If any mats or netting are used, said mats or netting shall contain only natural fiber materials. Nylon or other synthetic materials shall not be used in mats or netting. All disturbed areas shall be revegetated with riparian or upland vegetation, as appropriate. All Project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from the stream and from areas where such materials could be washed into the stream. BR-5 Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing), shall be installed around the root zones of trees to remain, to protect those trees identified on the final site plans to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted. Protection measures shall remain in good working order during construction. BR-6 Prior to approval of construction permits, to minimize potential sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek, a sedimentation and erosion control plan shall be prepared that incorporates adequate best management practices to avoid potential sediment deposition in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. At a minimum, straw wattles (or comparably effective devices) shall be placed on the downslope sides of the proposed work which would direct flows into temporary sedimentation basins. During construction/improvements, the City shall check and maintain these measures regularly and after all larger storm events. All necessary remedial work and/or repairs shall be done immediately after the need for such work is identified. Item 2 Packet Page 87 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 23 Conclusion The project has the potential to result in impacts to special-status wildlife species and riparian habitat. Mitigation measures have been identified to require measures including, but not limited to, preconstruction surveys, avoidance buffers, protection of unimpacted resources, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. Upon implementation of mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-6, impacts to biological resources would be less than significant. 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? 16, 17 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 16 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 2, 16 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Evaluation Pre-Historic Setting Archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast for at least 10,000 years. The earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. The project site is located within a Burial Sensitivity Area as identified in Figure 1 of the COSE. Historic Setting The City COSE identifies Historic Districts and historic listed properties within the city and establishes various policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other community goals. These policies include, but are not limited to, the following: Identification, preservation, and rehabilitation of significant historic and architectural resources; Prevention of demolition of historically or architecturally significant buildings unless doing so is necessary to remove a threat to health and safety; Consistency in the design of new buildings in historical districts to reflect the form, spacing, and materials of nearby historic structures; and Identification and protection of neighborhoods or districts having historical character due to the collective effect of Contributing or Master List historic properties. The project is not located within a Historic District or Historic Perseveration Overlay Zone, and no historic structures are present onsite. The following analysis is based on the Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the North Broad Park and Rezone Project (source reference 16). Item 2 Packet Page 88 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 24 a) On March 20, 2020, a records search was requested from the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), located at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Staff at the CCIC completed the CHRIS records searches of the project area and all areas within a 1/8-mile radius on April 14, 2020. The CCIC records search data revealed that 12 cultural resources studies have been previously conducted within a 1/8- mile radius of the project area, none of which identified an archaeologic or historic resource within the project area or within 1/8-mile radius. The project site does not propose removal or alteration of structures with potential for historic designation. The project site does not currently contain, nor is it located near, any historic resources identified in the NRHP or CRHR. The project site is not identified on the City’s Historical Properties map; therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of, or any other adverse impact to, a historical resource and no impacts would occur. b) No archaeological resources were identified within the project area during the field survey. One Pismo clam (Tivela stultorum) shell fragment and one non-diagnostic fragment of ceramic were observed during the field survey. The materials were observed in a heavily disturbed context with modern refuse and development. Given the isolated nature of these materials and the lack of evidence that they represent historic or prehistoric activity, the shell fragment and the ceramic fragment do not constitute archaeological resources and warrant no further consideration. However, given the project area’s proximity to Stenner Creek and Old Garden Creek, diminished surface visibility at the time of survey, and proximity to Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa and mid-late nineteenth century neighborhood development, the project area is considered moderately sensitive for the presence of previously unidentified buried archaeological resources. Mitigation measure CR-1 has been identified to require preparation of an archaeological monitoring plan and CR-2 has been identified to require monitoring of initial ground-disturbing activities with potential to encounter previously unidentified archaeological resources by a City-approved archeologist and local Native American observer. Mitigation measure CR-3 has been identified to require construction crew training, and CR-4 identifies the proper procedures and contact in the event an inadvertent discovery of an archaeological or historical resource is made. Therefore, potential impacts associated with a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource would be less than significant with mitigation. c) The project site is located within a Burial Sensitivity Area associated with San Luis Obispo Creek identified in “Figure 1: Cultural Resources” of the City COSE. The City initiated consultation with local Native American tribes as applicable under AB 52 and SB 18 on December 17, 2019. Comments received from two Native American contacts expressed concern that the area is sensitive due to the project’s proximity to Old Garden and Stenner Creeks, but none had specific knowledge regarding cultural resources within or adjacent to the project site. No human remains are known to exist within the project site; however, the discovery of unknown human remains is a possibility during ground-disturbing activities. Protocol for properly responding to the inadvertent discovery of human remains is identified in State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and is detailed in mitigation measure CR-5. With implementation of mitigation measure CR-5, potential impacts related to the inadvertent discovery of human remains would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures CR-1 Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, an Archaeological Monitoring Plan shall be prepared. The Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A list of personnel involved in the monitoring activities; b. Description of Native American involvement; c. Description of how the monitoring shall occur; d. Description of location and frequency of monitoring (e.g., full time, part time, spot checking); e. Description of what resources are expected to be encountered; f. Description of circumstances that would result in the halting of work at the project site; g. Description of procedures for halting work on the site and notification procedures; Item 2 Packet Page 89 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 25 h. Description of monitoring reporting procedures; i. Description of notification of local Native American tribes in the event of a discovery; and j. Provide specific, detailed protocols for what to do in the event of the discovery of human remains. CR-2 The applicant shall retain a City-approved archaeologist and local Native American observer to monitor Project-related ground-disturbing activities that have the potential to encounter previously unidentified archaeological resources, as outlined in the Archaeological Monitoring Plan. Archaeological and tribal monitoring may cease only if the City- approved archaeologist determines in coordination with the City Project Manager, Community Development Director and the Native American monitor that Project activities do not have the potential to encounter and/or disturb unknown resources. CR-3 Prior to initial ground disturbance activities, the City-approved archaeologist shall conduct a brief construction worker awareness training for all construction personnel, pursuant to the approved Archaeological Monitoring Plan. This training shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: a. A detailed description of the potential types of archaeological resources that could be encountered during project excavations; b. The relevant environmental laws and penalties; c. Best management practices; d. Responsibilities of project personnel; and e. Who to contact in the event of an inadvertent discovery, inclusive of local Native American tribes. CR-4 In the event that historical or archaeological remains are discovered during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and Community Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct an assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. CR-5 In the event that human remains are exposed during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and City Community Development Director shall be notified. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s construction plans. Conclusion Based on the records search conducted through the CCIC of the California Historical Resources Information System and field survey of the project site, no known historical or archaeological resources are present on-site. However, due to the project site location and proximity to historic-era resources and perennial water sources, the site has moderate potential for buried, previously undiscovered resources. Mitigation measures have been identified above to require worker awareness training and the appropriate protocol for inadvertent resource discovery and discovery of human remains. Upon implementation of measures CR-1 through CR-5, potential impacts to cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant. Item 2 Packet Page 90 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 26 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? 1, 18 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The City’s current electricity provider is Monterey Bay Community Power (MBCP), which provides 100% carbon-free electricity to City government facilities, residences, and private businesses within the City. The City 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 Climate Action Plan also identifies strategies and policies to increase use of cleaner and renewable energy resources in order to achieve the City’s GHG 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 18). a, b) During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The energy consumed during construction would be short term and would not represent a significant or wasteful demand on available resources. The project does not include installation of any new lighting or other equipment that would result in a long-term energy demand. The proposed park would serve local residents, primarily residents who reside in the immediately adjacent neighborhoods and does not include any on-site parking. Therefore, the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or result in a conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or result in a conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency; therefore, potential impacts to energy would be less than significant and no mitigation is necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 91 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 27 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. 19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iv. Landslides? 1, 19 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1, 19, 21 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1, 19, 21, 22 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1, 21 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 23, 24 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation Faulting and Seismic Activity The City 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, 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 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 in valleys. 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 resist seismic shaking. Based on the City Safety Element Earthquake Faults – Local Area map, the project site is not located on or within the immediate vicinity of an active fault zone. The nearest potentially active fault zones would be the Cambria fault zone, located approximately 1.8 miles northeast of the project site, and the Los Osos fault zone, located approximately 1.6 miles to the southwest. Item 2 Packet Page 92 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 28 Seismic-Related Ground Failure Settlement is defined as the condition in which a portion of the ground supporting part of a structure or facility lowers more than the rest or becomes softer, usually because ground shaking reduces the voids between soil particles, often with groundwater rising in the process. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of the soil’s supporting strength due to groundwater filling and lubricating the spaces between soil particles as a result of ground shaking. Soils with high risk for liquefaction are typically sandy and in creek floodplains or close to lakes. In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt, break apart, or sink into the ground. The likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with high liquefaction potential. Slope Instability and Landsides Slope instability can occur as a gradual spreading of soil, a relatively sudden slippage, a rockfall, or in other forms. Causes include steep slopes, inherently weak soils, saturated soils, and earthquakes. Improper grading and manmade drainage can be contributing factors. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low landslide potential. Subsidence Land subsidence is a gradual settling or sudden sinking of the Earth’s surface due to subsurface movement of earth materials. Primary causes are groundwater withdrawal, in which water is removed from pore space as the water table drops, causing the ground surface to settle, tectonic subsidence (where the ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such as faulting or folding), and earthquake-induced shaking that causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to ground- surface subsidence. Based on the USGS map of areas of land subsidence in California, the project site is not located in an area known to have historical or current subsidence (source reference 21). Soil Limiting Factors The U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey indicates that soil in the project site is comprised of Salinas silty clay loam 2 to 9 percent slopes. This soil is common on terraces and is derived from sedimentary rock. This very deep, well drained, gently sloping and moderately sloping soil has moderately slow permeability and a surface runoff of slow or medium. The hazard of water erosion is slight or moderate. This soil is well suited to irrigated pasture and rangeland. Roads, buildings, and other structures need to be designed with consideration of the soil’s moderate strength and moderate shrink-swell potential. a.i) Based on Figure 3 (Earthquake Faults – Local Area) of the Safety Element and the DOC Fault Activity Map of California, no known fault lines are mapped on or within 0.5 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) Based on Figure 3 (Earthquake Faults – Local Area) of the City Safety Element and the DOC Fault Activity Map of California, no known fault lines are mapped on or within 0.5 mile of the project site. Due to the highly seismic nature of the region, potential future development on the project site would very likely be subject to strong seismic ground shaking at some point(s) during the life of the project. The project does not propose development of habitable structures and development of park facilities, including play structures, picnic benches, and equipment storage sheds would be constructed be designed in full compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code (CBC) to adequately withstand and minimize the risk associated with the level of seismic ground shaking expected to occur in the project region; therefore, impacts associated with strong seismic groundshaking would be less than significant. a.iii) Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with high liquefaction potential. The project does not include construction of new structures for long-term human occupancy. The proposed project facilities, including play structures, picnic benches, and equipment storage sheds would be constructed be designed in full compliance with seismic design criteria established in the CBC to adequately withstand Item 2 Packet Page 93 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 29 and minimize the risk associated with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Therefore, 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 Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low landslide potential. The project does not include grading on any steep slopes or toe slopes and does not propose development of habitable structures. Therefore, potential impacts associated with landslides would be less than significant. b) The project would result in approximately 0.35 acre of site disturbance on the 0.9-acre parcel, including removal of the existing concrete driveway apron on-site, paving of approximately 0.11-acre for walking paths, and removal of up to eight trees on-site. The project would include the protection of approximately 20 native trees on-site to remain in place, and the planting of 33 new trees and various native shrubs. The project would include grading, tree and vegetation removal, vegetation planting, and placement of fill materials that could result in temporary soil erosion. The project site is relatively flat and the soil unit onsite is not particularly susceptible to wind or water erosion. The City’s Municipal Code requires proposed development projects to implement erosion control measures and best management practices (BMPs) through the building permit process, such as scheduling ground disturbance to avoid rain events (if feasible); using hydroseeding, planting, and mulch to stabilize soils; using dust control to stabilize stockpiles, unpaved roads, and graded areas; protecting storm drain inlets; using sediment traps; constructing a stabilized page of aggregate and filter fabric at the construction access entrance; conducting street sweeping; and using silt fencing, sand/gravel bags, and fiber rolls. No substantial permanent changes in existing topography or total area of exposed soil would occur. Therefore, potential impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant. c) The park includes an approximately 0.5-acre area of relatively flat land with an elevation of 200 feet above mean sea level. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low landslide potential. Based on the USGS map of areas of land subsidence in California, the project site is not located in an area known to have historical or current subsidence. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with high liquefaction potential. The project does not include construction of new structures for long-term human occupancy. The proposed project facilities, including play structures, picnic benches, and equipment storage sheds would be constructed be designed in full compliance with seismic design criteria established in the CBC to adequately withstand and minimize the risk associated with seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Therefore, impacts related to location on an unstable geologic unit or soil would be less than significant. d) The project site is underlain by Salinas silty clay loam 2-9% slopes, which has moderate shrink swell potential. The project does not include construction of new structures for long-term human occupancy. The proposed project facilities, including play structures, picnic benches, and equipment storage sheds would be constructed to follow applicable CBC standards to adequately protect proposed park development facilities against soil stability hazards, including expansive soils. Upon implementation of these measures, potential impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant. e) The project does not include construction of new restroom facilities or other structures that would require installation of an on-site sewer system. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f) The project site is underlain by alluvial gravel and sand of valley areas of the Holocene epoch of the Quaternary period. Holocene age units, particularly those younger than 5,000 years old, are generally too young to contain fossilized material. In addition, the project would not result in deep cuts into a hillside or deep excavations on-site that could disturb the underlying geologic unit. Therefore, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 94 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 30 Conclusion The proposed project facilities, including play structures, picnic benches, and equipment storage sheds would be constructed be designed in full compliance with seismic design criteria established in the CBC to adequately withstand and minimize the risk associated with geologic hazards. No potentially significant impacts associated with geology or soils would occur and no mitigation is necessary. 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, 9, 18 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 1, 9, 18 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) are 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 2018, the City prepared a community- wide inventory of GHG emissions for the 2016 calendar year. In 2016, San Luis Obispo’s total GHG emissions were estimated to be 339,290 MTCO2e. Consistent with the emissions inventory of 2005, transportation was the largest contributor to the City’s total GHG emissions with an estimated 212,980 MTCO2e, or 63 percent of the City’s total emissions. Commercial and Industrial energy was the second largest sector with GHG emissions of 44,270 MTCO2e or 13 percent of the City’s total emissions. The sectors of residential energy and solid waste account for the remaining 26 percent of the City’s total 2016 GHG emissions (source reference 18). Statewide legislation, rules, and regulations have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions from significant sources. Senate Bill (SB) 32 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 extended the state’s GHG reduction goals and required the CARB to regulate sources of GHGs to meet a state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Other statewide policies adopted to reduce GHG emissions include Assembly Bill (AB) 32, SB 375, SB 97, Clean Car Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, CBC, and the California Solar Initiative. In October 2008, ARB published its Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan, which is the State’s plan to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32. This initial Scoping Plan contained the main strategies to be implemented in order to achieve the target emission levels identified in AB 32. The Scoping Plan included ARB-recommended GHG reductions for each emissions sector of the state’s GHG inventory. The largest proposed GHG reduction recommendations were associated with improving emissions standards for light-duty vehicles, implementation of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard program, energy efficiency measures in buildings and appliances and the widespread development of combined heat and power systems, and a renewable portfolio standard for electricity production. A key component of the Scoping Plan is the Renewable Portfolio Standard, which is intended to increase the percentage of renewables in California’s electricity mix to 33 percent by year 2020, resulting in a reduction of 21.3 MMTCO2e. The Scoping Plan states that land use planning and urban growth decisions will play important roles in the state’s GHG reductions because local governments have primary authority to plan, zone, approve, and permit how land is developed to accommodate population growth and the changing needs of their jurisdictions. ARB further acknowledges that decisions on how land is used will have large impacts on the GHG emissions that will result from the transportation, housing, industry, forestry, water, agriculture, electricity, and natural gas emissions sectors. Item 2 Packet Page 95 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 31 Plans, policies, and guidelines have also 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. The Bright-Line Threshold of 1,150 metric tons of CO2 equivalent per year (MTCO2e/year) was the most applicable GHG threshold for most projects, and Table 1-1 in the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (updated November 2017) provided a list of general land uses and the estimated sizes or capacity of those uses expected to exceed the GHG Bright Line Threshold of 1,150 MTCO2e/year. Projects that exceeded the criteria or were within 10% of exceeding the criteria presented in Table 1-1 were required to conduct a more detailed analysis of air quality impacts. It is important to note the Bright-Line Threshold of 1,150 MTCO2e/year was developed to meet the state goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; therefore, because the construction and operation of the project would occur well beyond 2020, this threshold is no longer valid. The project would be subject to the SB 32-based targets for 2030, which are 40% below the AB 32-based 2020 targets. The SLOAPCD’s GHG thresholds have not been updated to comply with SB 32 and the more recent, more stringent GHG reduction goals; therefore, the project’s greenhouse gas emissions have been evaluated based on the City of San Luis Obispo’s recently adopted GHG emissions thresholds provided in the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery, which have been calculated to be consistent with the reduction requirements of SB 32. The City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery is a long-range plan to reduce GHG emissions from City government operations and community activities. The Climate Action Plan will also help achieve multiple community goals such as lowering energy costs, reducing air pollution, supporting local economic development. The Climate Action Plan was prepared with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2035. The Climate Action Plan includes measures to reduce community- wide GHG emissions by 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 66 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, which is consistent with California’s goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (source reference 18). a, b) Projects that are consistent with the demographic forecasts and land use assumptions used in the Climate Action Plan can utilize the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the CAP’s GHG emissions reduction strategy. The demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the Climate Action Plan are based on the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements. If a plan or project is consistent with the existing 2014 General Plan land use and zoning designations of the project site, then the project would be considered consistent with the demographic forecasts and the land uses assumptions of the Climate Action Plan. If the project is not consistent with the existing 2014 General Plan land use and zoning designations of the project site, the next step of evaluation is to determine whether the proposed use would be of equal or lesser greenhouse gas emission-intensive as existing development on-site. If the proposed use is less GHG-intensive than existing uses on-site, the project then must be evaluated for consistency with the CAP’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Checklist. The Land Use Element identifies this site as a special facility for parks and recreation (community garden) in Table 4.14- 2 (Draft LUCE Program EIR). Furthermore, the Parks and Recreation Element identifies this site as a special recreation area (community garden) (PRE 3.8), and also identifies this site as an opportunity for expanded recreational facilities (PRE 3.12). While the project includes a General Plan Amendment to change the designation of the site from Open Space to Park and a rezone from Conservation/Open Space to Public Facility to accommodate the proposed park and associated playground equipment, the project is consistent with the Climate Action Plan because the project does not include installation of any new lighting or other equipment that would result in a long-term energy demand, does not include on- site parking, and the park would serve local residents, primarily residents who reside in the immediately adjacent neighborhoods. In addition, GHG emissions associated with construction and operation of proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod. The construction period of the project is anticipated to result the disturbance of approximately 0.35 acres including approximately 0.11 acres to be paved and materials would be balanced on site, which would result in approximately 61.5 MTCO2e. During the operation, the project would result in approximately 7.4 MTCO2e/year at the time of buildout in 2021, and would result in approximately 6.1 MTCO2e/year by the year 2030. Operational greenhouse gas emissions for the proposed neighborhood park can be mostly attributed to vehicle trips to and from the park, which would be roughly equal to, or have a negligible increase from vehicle trips to and from the existing community garden on- site. In addition, as noted above, the project would likely serve the existing neighborhood and would likely be accessed by Item 2 Packet Page 96 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 32 non-vehicular modes, similar to the proximate Anholm Park. Therefore, the project would be generally of equal or lesser GHG-intensive as existing uses on-site. Because the project would result in an equal or lesser GHG-intensive use as existing uses on-site, the project can tier from the City’s CAP by illustrating compliance with the CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Checklist, shown in Table 4, below. Table 4. Project Consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan Climate Action Plan Measures Project Consistency Clean Energy Systems Does the Project include an operational commitment to participate in Central Coast Community Energy? Consistent. The project includes the establishment of a new City-owned facility and therefore any and all electricity use would be serviced by Central Coast Community Energy. Green Buildings Does the Project exclusively include “All-electric buildings”? For the purpose of this checklist, the following Consistent/Not Applicable. The project does not include the construction of new habitable structures. Proposed equipment storage sheds would be constructed in compliance with applicable building and energy codes and would not include heating, lighting, air conditioning, or other energy uses. If the Project/Plan includes a new mixed-fuel building or buildings (plumbed for the use of natural gas as fuel for space heating, water heating, cooking or clothes drying appliances) does that building/those buildings meet or exceed the City’s Energy Reach code? Connected Community Does the Project comply with requirements in the City’s Municipal Code with no exceptions, including bicycle parking, bikeway design, and EV charging stations? Consistent. The project has been designed in full compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and includes provision of bicycle racks and no vehicle parking spaces. Is the estimated Project-generated Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) within the City’s adopted thresholds, as confirmed by the City’s Transportation Division? Consistent. Based on the City’s Adopted VMT thresholds, the project would be classified as an “other development project” which has no set threshold and are to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Based on the proposed use of a neighborhood park in an area with no existing park facilities, the provision of improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and no new parking spaces proposed, the project would result in minimal VMT and would be consistent with applicable City VMT policies. If “No”, does the Project/Plan include VMT mitigation strategies and/or a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan approved by the City’s Transportation Division? Does the Project demonstrate consistency with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan? Consistent. The project would include provision of bicycle racks and would not result in a conflict with any policies of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan. Circular Economy Will the Project subscribe all units and/or buildings to organic waste pick up and provide the appropriate on- site enclosures consistent with the provisions of the City of San Luis Obispo Development Standards for Solid Waste Services? Please provide a letter from San Luis Garbage company verifying that the project complies Consistent. The project would include on-site composting facilities in addition to solid waste enclosures in compliance with the City of San Luis Obispo Development Standards for Solid Waste Services. Item 2 Packet Page 97 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 33 with their standards and requirements for organic waste pick up. Natural Solutions Does the Project comply with Municipal Code requirements for trees? Consistent. The project would include the protection of approximately 20 native trees on-site to remain in place, and the planting of 33 new trees. New tree plantings would be selected and planted in accordance with applicable Municipal Code requirements. Based on the project’s compliance with the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Checklist, the project would be consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan and associated GHG emissions reduction strategy and SB 32 GHG reduction goals, and project-generated GHG emissions would not have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion Project-generated GHG emissions would not have a significant impact on the environment, nor would the project conflict with current or future GHG-reduction planning efforts. Therefore, potential impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions would be less than significant and no mitigation is necessary. 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1, 44 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 25, 26, 27 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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? 28 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 98 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 34 f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires? 1, 19 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation 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. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) 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 (DTSC) 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 (SWRCB) 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 Cal/EPA website: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. Based on a review of the SWRCB Geotracker database and the DTSC EnviroStor database, there are no active hazardous waste cleanup sites within the project site or immediately surrounding areas. The closest cleanup site is located approximately 0.11 mile south of the project site and has been remediated and closed since 1987 (source references 25, 26, 27). Based on the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, the project site is not located within the airport Land Use Planning Area or noise contours (source reference 28). a) The project does not propose the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous substances. Project construction activities would be required to comply with applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes. Any potentially hazardous substances used within the project site (e.g., gasoline, cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.) would be transported, stored, and used according to regulatory requirements and existing procedures for the handling of hazardous materials. Therefore, project impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous substances would be less than significant. b) Project grading, construction, and tree removal activities would require the use of limited quantities of hazardous substances, including gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic fluid, solvents, oils, paints, etc. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and state environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of hazardous materials, including response and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Upon completion of construction, the project does not propose the handling or use of hazardous materials or volatile substances that would result in a significant risk of upset or accidental release conditions. Aerially deposited lead (ADL) from the historical use of leaded gasoline, exists along roadways throughout California. There is the likely presence of soils with elevated concentrations of lead as a result of ADL within the US 101 road shoulders and right of way. The highest lead concentrations are usually found within 10 feet of the edge of the pavement and within the top six inches of the soil. In some cases, lead is as deep as two to three feet below the surface and can extend 20 feet or more from the edge of pavement (source reference 44). The closest portion of the project parcel is located over 100 feet from the edge of the pavement of US 101. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c) The project site is located within 0.25-mile of two private schools, Old Mission School and Mission College Preparatory Catholic High School. Both schools are located on the opposite side of US 101, therefore, the potential for transport of hazardous materials from project-related construction or operational activities is very low. Limited quantities of hazardous materials would be used on-site during project grading and construction activities. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and state environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of hazardous materials, including response and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Based on compliance with existing hazardous material regulations, and the physical separation of US 101 between the project site and nearby schools, project Item 2 Packet Page 99 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 35 impacts associated with hazardous emissions and handling hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of existing or proposed school facilities would be less than significant. d) Based on a search of the DTSC EnviroStar database, the SWRCB Geotracker database, and Cal/EPA’s Cortese List website, there are no hazardous waste cleanup sites within the project site. The closest historical cleanup site is located approximately 0.15 mile west of the project site and has been remediated and closed since 1987. There are no active hazardous waste cleanup sites within 0.5 mile of the project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur. e) The project site is located approximately three miles north of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. Based on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport ALUP, the project is not located within the airport Land Use Planning Area or noise contours. Therefore, potential impacts associated with safety hazards or excessive noise from aircraft would be less than significant. f) 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 or road closures would occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. g) The project site is generally surrounded by residential and commercial uses to the north, west, and south and by US 101 to the east. The project is not located in an urban-wildland interface area. Project construction activities would be required to comply with the California Fire Code and would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project does not propose the routine transport, use, handling, or disposal of hazardous substances. The project site is not located within proximity to any known contaminated sites. No potentially significant impacts associated with hazards or hazardous materials would occur and no mitigation is necessary. 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? 1, 29, 32 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? 1, 29, 31 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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; 1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 100 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 36 ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? 1, 30 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? 1, 30, 34 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? 1, 31 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Evaluation The project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed. The San Luis Obispo Creek watershed is an approximately 53,271-acre coastal basin in southern San Luis Obispo County. It rises to an elevation of about 2,500 feet above sea level in the Santa Lucia Range. San Luis Obispo Creek flows to the Pacific Ocean and has six major tributary basins: Stenner Creek, Prefumo Creek, Laguna Lake, East Branch San Luis Obispo Creek, Davenport Creek, and See Canyon. San Luis Obispo Creek flows through the City and empties into the Pacific Ocean just west of Avila Beach (source reference 29). 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 Post-Construction Stormwater Management requirements adopted by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 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 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 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 FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer, the project site is located within a 100-year flood zone (source reference 30). In 2015, the state legislature approved the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA requires governments and water agencies of high- and medium-priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. Under SGMA, these basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their sustainability plans. The project is located within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin, which has been designated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as a high-priority basin. The County of San Luis Obispo (County) and the City formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) within their respective jurisdictions to ensure full compliance with SGMA throughout the entire San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin (source reference 31). a) Based on the City’s Waterway Management Plan Drainage Design Manual, all construction projects in the City require the installation, maintenance, routine inspection (i.e. weekly, before predicted rain events, after rain events and during prolonged rain events), and repair or replacement, as needed, of BMPs throughout the course of the construction project in order to protect local water quality. Most BMPs (e.g., concrete/tool washouts, street sweeping) are required year-long and others are specifically required during the rainy season (October 15 through April 15) or prior to a predicted rain event, even if that rain event is predicted during the summer months. The project would require the removal of six trees and includes the planting of ten trees and various native shrubs within 20 feet of the creek banks onsite. The proposed vegetation removal and planting and other construction-related activities would have the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and/or Stenner Creek, which could result in a degradation of water quality. Mitigation measure BR-6 has been identified to reduce potential impacts to the water quality of onsite creeks through implementation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan to avoid sediment Item 2 Packet Page 101 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 37 deposition in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Therefore, potential impacts associated with violation of water quality standards or otherwise substantial degradation of surface or groundwater quality would be less than significant with mitigation. b) The project includes installation of a water fountain/water filling station that would be connected to the City water system. The City water system has four primary water sources, including the Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation), with 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) Project grading and construction activities would be subject to all applicable standards of the CBC and City Municipal Code that require sedimentation and erosion control on-site. The City Municipal Code requires proposed development projects to implement erosion control measures and BMPs through the building permit process, such as scheduling ground disturbance to avoid the rain events (if feasible); using hydroseeding, planting, and mulch to stabilize soils; using dust control to stabilize stockpiles, unpaved roads, and graded areas; protecting storm drain inlets; using sediment traps; constructing a stabilized page of aggregate and filter fabric at the construction access entrance; street sweeping; and using silt fencing and sand/gravel bags. In addition, mitigation measure BR-6 has been identified to require specific erosion control measures to protect on-site streams and riparian habitats. Therefore, potential impacts associated with substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site would be less than significant with mitigation. c.ii) The project would result in the installation of 0.11-acre (4,791.6 square feet) of impervious surfaces on the 0.9-acre project parcel. The project would be subject to the Central Coast RWQCB’s Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region, which identify performance requirements that include, but are not limited to, site design and runoff reduction, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and require the preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Control Plan. Based on compliance with RWQCB requirements and the limited amount of impervious surface proposed, and its proposed distribution throughout the site, the project would not result in a substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c.iii) Based on the limited area of proposed impervious surfaces, the project would not result in the generation of a substantial amount of new stormwater runoff. The project has been designed to accommodate project stormwater flows and direct them to the proposed gutter along the frontage of the property that would connect to existing City stormwater drainage systems. The project would be subject to the Central Coast RWQCB’s Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region, which identify performance requirements that include, but are not limited to, site design and runoff reduction, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and require the preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Control Plan. Therefore, potential impacts associated with increases of surface runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be less than significant. c.iv) Based on the City Safety Element Food Hazards Map, the project is located within a 100-year flood zone. The proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in impervious surfaces, blocking or diversion of on-site stream flows or improvements that would otherwise substantially alter existing drainage patterns onsite. Therefore, potential impacts associated with alteration of a course of a stream in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows would be less than significant. d) Based on the San Luis Obispo County Tsunami Inundation Maps, the project site is not located in an area with potential for inundation by a tsunami. The project site is not located within close proximity to a standing body of water with the potential for a seiche to occur. Based on the City Safety Element Food Hazards Map, the project is located within a 100-year flood zone. Project construction activities would be required to comply with applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes. Any potentially hazardous substances used within the project site (e.g., gasoline, cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.) would be transported, stored, and used according to regulatory requirements and existing procedures for the handling of hazardous materials. During operation, the project would not include the storage or use of potentially hazardous materials on-site. Therefore, the project’s potential impacts associated with release pollutants due to project inundation would be less than significant. Item 2 Packet Page 102 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 38 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 SGMA, or other local or regional plans or policies intended to manage water quality or groundwater supplies; therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures Implement measure BR-6. Conclusion The project would not substantially increase impervious surfaces and does not propose alterations to existing water courses onsite. The proposed vegetation removal and planting would have the potential to cause erosion and sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and/or Stenner Creek, which could result in a degradation of water quality. Mitigation measure BR-6 has been identified to reduce potential impacts to the water quality of onsite creeks through implementation of an erosion and sedimentation control plan to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. Upon implementation of BR-6, project impacts associated with hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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, 2, 35 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Evaluation The project site consists of a 0.9-acre parcel currently zoned Conservation/Open Space (C/OS), and the current General Plan Designation is Open Space (OS). The project site is generally surrounded by residential and commercial uses to the north, west, and south and by US 101 to the east. As parks are not allowed within the C/OS zone, the project includes rezoning the parcel to Public Facility (PF) with a corresponding General Plan Map Amendment (Park). a) The project would establish a neighborhood park within an existing neighborhood and would be an infill development project. The project would not result in a physical division between an established community. The project would be consistent with the general level of development within the project vicinity and would not create, close, or impede any existing public or private roads, or create any other barriers to movement or accessibility within the community. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and no impacts would occur. b) The project includes the construction of a new park and the rezone of the project parcel from The General Plan Designation of Open Space (OS) to Park (P) and zoning from Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) to Public Facility (PF). The City Parks and Recreation Element identifies the unmet need for a neighborhood park in the Broad Street area near US 101 and establishes a target rate of park development to be 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City has a population of 46,802 in 2019 according to the City General Plan 2019 Annual Report, which would equate to a target of 465.5 acres of parkland. The city currently supports a total of 162.58 acres of parkland. Therefore, this project would contribute to the City achieving its target park ratio and would meet the current need for a neighborhood park in a residential area of the city that does not have access to other public park facilities. As discussed in the resource sections above, creek setbacks Item 2 Packet Page 103 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 39 would be maintained, tree removal would be conducted in accordance with the City Tree Regulations, and project construction would be carried out in compliance with applicable City Municipal Code standards. Based on the City Noise Element and LUCE EIR, the project is located within the 70 dB noise contour of US 101. Table 1 of the Noise Element establishes an exterior noise threshold of 65 dB CNEL from transportation noise sources for neighborhood parks and 70 dB CNEL for playgrounds. As noted in the City’s Noise Guidebook, the presence of dense vegetation, such as the riparian corridor between the highway and the project site, reduces noise levels by five decibels. In accordance with Noise Element Policy 1.8.2, noise reduction measures in descending order of preference are detailed below: a. Provide distance between noise source and recipient; b. Provide distance plus planted earthern berms; c. Provide distance and planted earthern berms, combined with sound walls; d. Provide earthern berms combined with sound walls; e. Provide sound walls only; f. Integrate buildings and sound walls to create a continuous noise barrier. Because this policy consistency addresses potential impacts of the environment on the project, rather than impacts of the project on the environment, potential inconsistency would not constitute a potentially significant impact under CEQA. In addition, a potential policy inconsistency only results in an adverse effect under CEQA if it would result in some physical change to the environment. As the current noise levels are existing and would not be exacerbated by the neighborhood park use, potential impacts related to a potential inconsistency would be less than significant. However, if the City requires construction of a planted earthen berm or sound wall to reduce existing ambient noise levels, that physical change could have a potential impact on the environment. Installation of noise abatement components such as a sound wall or earthern berm would have the potential to result in impacts associated with aesthetics, construction equipment noise and air pollutant emissions, erosion and sedimentation, and disturbance of undiscovered cultural resources. Potential impacts associated with construction of a sound wall or earthern berm would be consistent with the level of impacts evaluated in this document for other project components. Impacts resulting from noise barrier installation associated with aesthetics and air pollutant emissions (including greenhouse gas emissions) would reflect a negligible increase over the aesthetic changes and air pollutant emissions that would result from the project as proposed; therefore, impacts associated with these changes would be less than significant. Mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-6, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1 have been identified to address potentially significant impacts associated with vegetation removal, erosion and sedimentation, disturbance of previously undiscovered archaeological resources, and construction noise. Through compliance with applicable local policies and regulations and implementation of these mitigation measures, potential impacts associated with installation of noise control barriers would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures Implement mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-6, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1. Conclusion No potentially significant impacts associated with land use would result from the proposed project; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 104 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 40 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? 2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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? 2 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Evaluation Based on the COSE, mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits. a-b) No impact. No known mineral resources are present within the project site and future extraction of mineral resources is very unlikely due to the urbanized nature of the area. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion No impacts to mineral resources were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. 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? 1, 36, 37 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 1, 38 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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, 28 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The City 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 below (Table 5). Item 2 Packet Page 105 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 41 Table 5. Maximum Noise Exposure for Noise-Sensitive Uses due to Transportation Noise Sources Noise-Sensitive Use Outdoor Activity Areas1 Indoor Spaces Ldn or CNEL in dB Ldn or CNEL in dB Leq 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 -- -- -- Note: Ldn = day-night average sound level, CNEL = community noise equivalent level, dB = decibels, Leq = equivalent continuous sound level, Lmax = maximum sound level. 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 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 5 for outdoor activity areas and indoor spaces of noise-sensitive land uses that were established before the new transportation noise source. In addition, per City Municipal Code Chapter 9.12 Noise Control, operating tools or equipment used in construction between weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or any time on Sundays or holidays is strictly prohibited, except for emergency works of public service utilities or by exception issued by the City Community Development Department. The Municipal Code also states that construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner, where technically and economically feasible, that the maximum noise levels at affected properties will not exceed 75 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at single-family residences, 80 dBA at multi-family residences, and 85 dBA at mixed residential/commercial uses. Based on the City Municipal Code, operating any device that creates vibration that is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond 150 feet from the source if on a public space or right-of-way is prohibited (9.12.050.B.7). a) The project includes grading, construction, and vegetation removal on the project site, as well as off-site improvements including constructing 215 linear feet of concrete sidewalk, gutter, and red-painted curb, as well as demolition of existing curbs and installation of accessible curb ramps at all four corners of the Lincoln Street/Broad Street intersection. The project site is located within 1,000 feet of multiple sensitive receptors, including single-family residential units to the north, west, and south of the project site, several of which are located within 50 feet of the proposed development areas. The project would include grading, site preparation, demolition, and construction activities that would require use of equipment that would generate noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA at 50 feet, which reflect the relative loudness as perceived by the human ear, as shown in Table 6 below. Item 2 Packet Page 106 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 42 Table 6. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA) 50 ft From Source Backhoe 80 Compactor 80 Concrete Mixer 85 Concrete Pump 82 Dozer 85 Excavator 85 Heavy Truck 84 Paver 85 Scraper 85 Source reference: 37 Based on the equipment to be used and proximity to surrounding single-family residences, construction activities associated with future development of the site have the potential to exceed the construction noise limit of 75 dBA at single-family residences established in the City Municipal Code. Mitigation Measure N-1 has been identified to require that all construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational. In addition, all construction activities would be limited to daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and would be prohibited on Sundays and federal and state holidays, in accordance with the City Municipal Code Noise Control standards. Upon completion of construction activities, vehicle noise and recreational activity noise generated from the new neighborhood park would be consistent with the surrounding noise levels and would not result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels. Therefore, upon implementation of measure N-1, impacts associated with 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 would be less than significant with mitigation. b) The project does not propose pile driving or other high impact activities that would generate substantial groundborne noise or groundborne vibration during construction. With regard to human perception, vibration levels would begin to be perceptible at levels of 0.04 inches per second peak particle velocity (in/sec ppv), strongly perceptible at 0.10 in/sec ppv, and disturbing at 0.7 in/sec ppv. Groundborne vibration levels associated with representative construction equipment are summarized in Table 7 below. Item 2 Packet Page 107 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 43 Table 7. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Peak Particle Velocity at 25 feet (in/sec) Large bulldozer 0.089 Caisson drilling 0.089 Loaded trucks 0.076 Jackhammer 0.035 Small Bulldozers 0.0003 Source reference 38. While some construction activities may result in perceptible vibration, the project generated vibration levels would be below the threshold identified as being strongly perceptible to humans. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c) The project site is located approximately 3 miles north of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. Based on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport ALUP, the project is not located within the airport Land Use Planning Area or noise contours. Therefore, potential impacts associated with safety hazards or excessive noise from aircraft would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures N-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be noted on all plans and implemented throughout the construction period: a. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational. b. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise-control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.). Conclusion With implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1, residual impacts associated with noise would be less than significant. 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)? 1, 39 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 108 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 44 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1, 39 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Evaluation 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 California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) 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 the city’s population increases to an estimated 70,000 persons during workdays (source reference 39). The City 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 ensuring safety and affordability, conserving existing housing, accommodating 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, maximizing affordable housing opportunities for those who live or work in the city, and developing housing on suitable sites. a) The project includes construction of a neighborhood park within an existing residential neighborhood. The project would be located on an infill site and would not include construction of any new residential or commercial uses. The project would include establishment of utility connections to existing infrastructure within the Broad Street right-of-way and would not result in the extension of roads or other infrastructure. The project would not induce substantial unplanned growth; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b) The project includes construction of a neighborhood park within an existing residential neighborhood. The project site currently consists of a community garden. The project would not result in displacement of any existing housing or people; therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth or displace existing housing or people. The project would not result in potentially significant impacts to population or housing; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Police protection? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 109 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 45 Schools? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Parks? 1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Other public facilities? 1, 40 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The project site is located within the existing service area of the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department (SLOFD), with the clo sest station being City Fire Station 2. The oldest fire station in the City, Fire Station 2 was built in 1953 and provides primary response to the northern areas of San Luis Obispo and to the Cal Poly Campus. The station is staffed with a three-person paramedic engine company—one captain, one engineer, and one firefighter. The City of San Luis Obispo Police Department (SLOPD), which consists of 85.5 employees, 59 of which are sworn police officers, provides public safety services for the city. The SLOPD operates out of one main police station located at 1042 Walnut Street at the intersection of Santa Rosa (Highway 1) and US 101. The project is located within the San Luis Coastal Unified School District (SLCUSD), and public parks and recreation trails within the city are managed and maintained by the City Parks and Recreation Department and Public Works Department. a) Fire protection: The project would include development of a new neighborhood park within an infill site that would serve an existing residential community. The project would not result in the development of new residences or induce population growth within the area. Therefore, the project would not result in the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities and potential impacts would be less than significant. Police protection: The project would include development of a new neighborhood park within an infill site that would serve an existing residential community. The project would not result in the development of new residences or induce population growth within the area. Therefore, the project would not result in the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities and potential impacts would be less than significant. Schools: The project would include devel opment of a new park within an infill site that would serve an existing residential community. The project would not result in the development of new residences or induce population growth within the area. Therefore, the project would not result in the need for n ew or physically altered school facilities and potential impacts would be less than significant. Parks: The project includes development of a new neighborhood park in an area identified as needing park facilities in the City Parks and Recreation Element and would expand and improve upon existing on-site facilities, including the existing community garden on-site. The project would not result in the need for the construction or expansion of park facilities; therefore, no impacts would occur. Other public facilities: The project would result in the conversion of an 18-plot community garden to a neighborhood park. The project would include provision of nine new garden plots onsite, in addition to added amenities including on- site composting, potting benches, and custom wheel-chair accessible elevated planters with potting platforms. With the provision of garden amenities incorporated into the project, potential impacts associated with the loss of community garden facilities would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project includes development of a new neighborhood park to serve an existing residential community and would not result in an increased need for public services such as fire or police protection. No potentially significant impacts would occur and no mitigation is necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 110 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 46 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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? 1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Evaluation Existing City recreation facilities consist of 28 parks and recreational facilities, in addition to ten designated natural resources and open space areas and two bike trails. The City Parks and Recreation Element identifies goals, policies, and programs to help plan, develop, and maintain community parks and recreation facilities. The City’s statement of overall department goals is for the City Parks and Recreation facilities and programs to enable all citizens to participate in fun, healthful, or enriching activities that enhance the quality of life in the community. As demand for recreation facilities and activities grow and change, the City intends to focus its efforts in the following areas: continuing development of athletic fields and support facilities, providing parks in underserved neighborhoods, providing a multi-use community center and therapy pool, expanding paths and trails for recreational use, linking recreation facilities, and meeting the special needs of disabled persons, at-risk youth, and senior citizens (source reference 40). a) The project would include development of a new neighborhood park within an infill site that would serve an existing residential community. Development of the new park would not result in population growth within the area or lead to an increase of the use of other existing parks or other recreational facilities; therefore, no impacts would occur. b) The project would include development of a new neighborhood park as well as off-site accessibility improvements. The development of new park facilities would have the potential to have adverse physical effects on the environment, as discussed in the resource sections in this document. Mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BR-1 through BR-6, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1 have been identified to reduce these potential impacts to less than significant. Therefore, potential impacts associated with the development of recreational facilities would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures Implement measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, BR-1 through BR-6, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1. Conclusion The project would not result in increased use of existing recreational facilities. The project includes development of new park facilities that would have the potential to result in adverse physical effects on the environment. Mitigation measures have been identified in the resource sections within this document that would reduce these potential impacts to less than significant. Therefore, upon implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, potential impacts associated with recreation would be less than significant. Item 2 Packet Page 111 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 47 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, 41 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The City Circulation Element identifies current traffic levels and 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 alternative transportation, such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and carpooling; promoting 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. The City 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. In 2013, SB 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 SB 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. SLO Transit operates transit service within 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. a) Project construction activities would result in a temporary marginal increase of vehicle traffic to and from the project site. Upon completion of project construction, the new neighborhood park would not generate a substantial amount of new vehicle trips because it would serve the immediately surrounding residential neighborhoods and would include installation of new bike racks and accessible sidewalks to encourage pedestrian and bicycle access. No on-site parking is proposed. Therefore, the project would be generally consistent with City goals and policies associated with promoting alternative modes of transportation and development of accessible pedestrian infrastructure. The project would not result in a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Item 2 Packet Page 112 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 48 b) The City Council adopted revised thresholds of significance for analysis of transportation impacts pursuant to Senate Bill 743 on June 16th, 2020. The revised thresholds of significance replaced Level of Service (LOS) with Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) as the City’s performance measure for CEQA analysis of transportation impacts. Based on the size and scope of the project, construction vehicle trips would not result in a substantial number of vehicle trips, would likely utilize a local contractor, and would be temporary in nature. Upon completion of construction, the new neighborhood park would serve the existing surrounding residential neighborhoods and would include amenities to encourage alternative modes of transportation through provision of onsite bicycle racks, construction of new accessible sidewalks to access the site, and lack of on-site vehicle parking space. The project would provide park amenities in an area that is currently lacking them and would, therefore, reduce longer trips currently being made to other park facilities in the City. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant increase in VMT and potential impacts would be less than significant. c) The project includes construction of approximately 125 linear feet of new sidewalk, red painted curb, and gutter to allow for safe and adequate access to and from the project site. These components would be designed and constructed in compliance with applicable City Department of Public Works and Municipal Code requirements and would not result in hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. In addition, the project would result in the r emoval of street parking leading up to the on- and off- ramps of US 101, potentially improving safety conditions at that location; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. d) The project includes construction of approximately 125 linear feet of new sidewalk with red painted curb to allow for adequate emergency vehicle access to and from the project site. These components would be designed and constructed in compliance with applicable City Fire Department and other local emergency access requirements and would not result in inadequate emergency access; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project would not result in a conflict with local or regional circulation programs or policies and would be consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) regarding VMT. Proposed improvements within the City right-of-way would be required to meet City Public Works safety design standards and would maintain adequate emergency access. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts related to transportation would occur and no mitigation is necessary. 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)? 16, 17 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 113 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 49 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. 16, 17 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Evaluation Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be evaluated under CEQA. Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following: 1. Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: a. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; or b. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k). 2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1(c). In applying these criteria for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe. Recognizing that tribes have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if they have requested notice of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead agency must consult with the tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources as a result of a project. Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or significance of tribal cultural resources, the level of significance of a project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and available project alternatives and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources. a-b) The City has sent AB 52 and SB 18 consultation invitation letters to local tribes in the area regarding the proposed project and received a response from Patti Dunton of the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo and Monterey Counties requesting a Phase 1 archaeological survey be conducted. A response was also received from Fred Collins, Spokesperson for the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, who also requested a records search and Phase 1 survey be conducted. Copies of the records search and field survey results have been provided to both parties. Representatives from the Salinan Tribe and Santa Ynez Band of Mission Indians requested the presence of a Native American monitor during ground disturbance, and to be notified in the event of unanticipated discoveries. These measures have been included as mitigation requirements. While no archaeological resources were observed during the field survey or identified by past surveys, the project area has moderate sensitivity for buried resources based on the site’s proximity to Stenner Creek and Old Garden Creek, diminished surface visibility at the time of survey, and proximity to Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa and mid-late nineteenth century neighborhood development. The project site does not contain any known tribal cultural resources that have been listed or been found eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1. Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-5 have been identified to require preparation and implementation of an archeological monitoring plan, inclusion of a Native American monitor, cultural resource awareness training, and cessation of work if a discovery is made until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find. Therefore, potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures Implement measures CR-1 through CR-5. Item 2 Packet Page 114 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 50 Conclusion Upon implementation of mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-5, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant. 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? 1 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? 1, 33, 42 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 1, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The City Utilities Department is the sole water provider within the city, provides potable and recycled water to the community, and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) treats all of the wastewater from the city, Cal Poly, and the County airport. The facility treats 4.5 million gallons of wastewater per day, 365 days a year. The most recent upgrade to the WRRF was completed to improve the quality of water discharged into San Luis Obispo Creek (located downstream of the project site). The WRRF has very stringent discharge requirements and now produces a high-quality effluent that surpasses drinking water standards for many constituents. Plans to utilize a portion of this effluent to irrigate parks, median strips, landscaping, and other appropriate uses are being implemented under the City’s Water Reuse Program. The City currently has an exclusive franchise agreement with San Luis Garbage to provide solid waste and recycling services to the residents and businesses within the city. The nearest landfill to San Luis Obispo is Cold Canyon Landfill located approximately 4.1 miles from the city limits. Based on the facility detail provided by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Cold Canyon Landfill has approximately 13,100,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity as of February 2020, which equates to approximately 54.8% of its maximum permitted capacity, and the facility is expected to accommodate the surrounding city and county customers’ solid waste until approximately 2040. a) The project would include construction of a new connection to the City water system for the proposed water fountain/filling station, proposed irrigation, and the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities to connect to the existing City stormwater drainage system. The project is not within the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan Area and therefore recycled water is not available for irrigation use. These new utility components would have the potential to result in noise and dust Item 2 Packet Page 115 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 51 emissions in proximity to sensitive receptor locations, such as single-family residences. There would also be the potential for discovery of sub-surface cultural resources during proposed utility work. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1 would reduce potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from installation and establishment of new utility connections associated with air quality, cultural resources, and noise to less than significant. Therefore, potential environmental impacts associated with construction or extension of existing utilities would be less than significant with mitigation. b, c) The project would not include provision of restrooms or other uses that would require connection to wastewater treatment service. The project would include construction of a new connection to the City water system for the proposed water fountain/filling station. The water fountain/filling station would be used intermittently by park visitors and would result in minimal water demand on City water resources. The project would be serviced by the City water system, which has four primary water sources, including the Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation), with groundwater serving as a fifth supplemental source. The City of San Luis Obispo no longer draws groundwater for potable purposes as of 2015. The project is not within the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan Area and therefore recycled water is not available for irrigation use. As of November 2019, both the Salinas Reservoir and Whale Rock Reservoir are above 85% storage capacity, and Nacimiento is at 45% storage capacity. Therefore, the project would have adequate water supplies during normal, dry, and multiple dry years and potential impacts would be less than significant. d) The project would include provision of solid waste and recycling receptacles that would be serviced by San Luis Garbage and brought to Cold Canyon Landfill. The Cold Canyon Landfill has approximately 13,100,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity as of February 2020 and is expected to reach capacity in 2040. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. e) The proposed neighborhood park landscaping, solid waste collection, and recycling would be maintained in compliance with the standards set forth in the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services for trash, green waste, and recycling. Therefore, the project would be in compliance with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Implement measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1. Conclusion Upon implementation of mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-4, CR-1 through CR-5, and N-1, potential impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant. 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Item 2 Packet Page 116 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 52 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Evaluation The project is located in an urban area within the City. 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 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 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 or road closures would occur as a result of project implementation; therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant. b) The project development site currently consists of a relatively flat area with community garden plots and a variety of native and non-native trees and vegetation. The project would result in grading, tree and vegetation removal, tree and vegetation planting, and installation of park amenities including play structures, picnic tables, and garden beds. The project would not result in any major changes to the existing topography or removal of any significant natural wind barriers. Limited quantities of flammable materials would be used on-site during project grading and construction activities. Construction contractors would be required to comply with applicable federal and state environmental and workplace safety laws for the handling of flammable materials, including response and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Therefore, based on proposed project activities and compliance with applicable standards, potential impacts associated with exacerbation of wildfire risks and exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire would be less than significant. c) The project would require a new connection to City water services within the City public right-of-way. No new electrical or other utility connections would be required. The new connection to City water services would be installed in full compliance with applicable CBC and City Fire Department standards; therefore, potential impacts associated with exacerbation of fire risk from installation of new infrastructure would be less than significant. d) The project would not result in any major changes to the existing site topography or drainage patterns. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map in the City Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with low landslide potential. Therefore, the project would not result in exposure of people or structures to significant risks as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures None necessary. Conclusion The project would not result in potentially significant impacts associated with wildfire; therefore, no mitigation is necessary. Item 2 Packet Page 117 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 53 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 project would have the potential to adversely affect special-status wildlife species and their habitats, as described in Section 4. Biological Resources, above. Mitigation measures BR-1 through BR-6 have been identified to avoid and reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels. The project would have the potential to impact previously undiscovered sub-surface cultural resources that may be present within proposed disturbance areas. Mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-5 have been identified to require preparation and implementation of an Archaeological Monitoring Plan, construction worker awareness training, and notification protocols for incidental discovery of cultural resources to avoid potentially significant impacts. With implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. 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)? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ When project impacts are considered along with or in combination with other reasonably foreseeable impacts, the project’s potential cumulative impacts may be significant. Mitigation measures have been identified in the resource sections above to reduce project-related impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based on implementation of identified project-specific mitigation measures and the relatively limited number and extent of potential impacts, the cumulative effects of the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant with mitigation. 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 project has the potential to result in significant impacts associated with air quality and noise that could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to, standard idling restrictions, dust control measures, and implementation noise control measures. With incorporation of mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study, potential environmental effects of the project Item 2 Packet Page 118 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 54 would not directly or indirectly result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Item 2 Packet Page 119 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 55 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. North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project Plans, December 2019 2. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation & Open Space Element, 2006. 3. California Scenic Highways Map Viewer, February 2017. Available at: https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=f0259b1ad0fe4093a5604c9b838a486a. 4. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010 5. City of San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations, March 2019 6. California Important Farmland Finder, 2016. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. 7. City of San Luis Obispo Interactive Parcel Viewer, January 2015. Available at: http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=3e0adee3aabd4805bd13f0d4705a4193. 8. SLOAPCD NOA Screening Map, 2019. Available at: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1YAKjBzVkwi1bZ4rQ1p6b2OMyvIM&ll=35.364986805363756 %2C-120.52563349999997&z=10. 9. Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Assessment for the Proposed N. Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project, San Luis Obispo, CA, May 2020. Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting. 10. San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan, December 2001 11. California Air Resources Board Area Designation Maps / State and National, December 2018. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations. 12. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 2012 (revised November 2017) 13. Biological Resources Technical Memorandum for the North Broad Park and Rezone Project, SWCA Environmental Consultants 2020 14. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California, February 2010. Available at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Connectivity/CEHC. 15. City of San Luis Obispo Heritage Trees Map, 2019. Available at: http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Solutions/s2.html?appid=74e2e5bf9e534eaabf95b0917da8bbc7. 16. Phase 1 Archaeological Survey for the North Broad Park and Rezone Project, SWCA Environmental Consultants 2020. 17. Historic Properties in San Luis Obispo, California (A SLO Story Map), accessed May 2020. Available at: https://gis.slocity.org/HistoricMapTour/index.html Item 2 Packet Page 120 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 56 18. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery, July 2020. Available at: <https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=27889 >. 19. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element, July 2000. 20. Fault Activity Map of California, 2010. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. 21. NRCS Web Soil Survey, 2019. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. 22. Areas of Land Subsidence in California, USGS 2020. Available at: https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidence-areas.html. 23. Geologic Map of the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, 2004. Available at: https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71738.htm. 24. Paleontological Resource Assessment: California Flats Solar Project. April 2013. Available at: https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=48222. 25. California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Envirostor. Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/. 26. State Water Resources Control Board, Geotracker. Available at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. 27. California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List Data Resources. Available at: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. 28. Airport Land Use Plan for the County of San Luis Obispo Regional Airport , 2005. Available at: https://www.sloairport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ALUP_TXT.pdf. 29. SLO Watershed Project, San Luis Obispo Creek Description, 2014. Available at: http://slowatershedproject.org/watersheds/san-luis-obispo-creek/. 30. Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer. Available at: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=- 86.117,37.9739,-85.2064,38.413. 31. San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin, County of San Luis Obispo Webpage, 2019. Available at: https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Committees-Programs/Sustainable-Groundwater- Management-Act-(SGMA)/San-Luis-Obispo-Valley-Groundwater-Basin.aspx. 32. Waterway Management Plan, Volume 1, San Luis Obispo Creek Watershed, 2003. Available at: https://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=4913. 33. Water Sources, City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Webpage, Accessed November 2019 34. Department of Conservation (DOC) Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Port San Luis Quadrangle, 2009 35. General Plan Annual Report, 2018. Available at: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=22768. 36. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Element, 1996. 37. Construction Noise Handbook: Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges, Federal Highway Administration, September 2017. Available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook07.cfm. 38. Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). September 2013. Available at: http://website.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgm-sep2013.pdf. 39. City of San Luis Obispo 2014-2019 General Plan Housing Element, 2015. 40. City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Element, 2001. 41. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element, 2017. 42. City of San Luis Obispo. 2018 Water Resources Status Report, 2018 43. SWIS Facility Detail Cold Canyon Landfill, Inc., California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Available at https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/40-AA-0004/Detail/. 44. Aerially Deposited Lead Contaminated Soils in State Highway Rights-of-Way, State of California Environmental Protection Agency Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2016. Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot- media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/dtsc-ct-adlfinal-063016-a11y.pdf. 45. City of San Luis Obispo. Municipal Code Chapter 12.24 Tree Regulations. Item 2 Packet Page 121 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 57 Attachments 1. Proposed Project Plans 2. Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact Assessment for the Proposed N. Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project, San Luis Obispo, CA. Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting. June 2020. 3. Biological Resources Technical Memorandum for the North Broad Park and Rezone Project, SWCA Environmental Consultants. 2020. Attachments are available online at: https://www.slocity.org/government/department- directory/community-development/documents-online/environmental-review-documents/- folder-2135 Item 2 Packet Page 122 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 58 REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Air Quality AQ-1 The following measures shall be implemented to minimize construction-generated emissions. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. Construction of the proposed project shall use low-VOC content paints not exceeding 50 grams per liter. b. To the extent locally available, prefinished building materials or materials that do not require the application of architectural coatings shall be used. c. Reduce the amount of the disturbed area where possible. d. Use water trucks, APCD approved dust suppressants (see Section 4.3 in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook), or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the District’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. Please note that since water use is a concern due to drought conditions, the contractor or builder shall consider the use of an APCD-approved dust suppressant where feasible to reduce the amount of water used for dust control. For a list of suppressants, see Section 4.3 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. e. All dirt stock-pile areas should be sprayed daily as needed. f. 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; g. 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. h. 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 SLOAPCD. i. 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. j. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the construction site. k. 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 CVC Section 23114. l. Install wheel washers at the construction site entrance, wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site, or implement other SLOAPCD-approved methods sufficient to minimize the track-out of soil onto paved roadways. m. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water should be used where feasible. Item 2 Packet Page 123 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 59 n. The burning of vegetative material shall be prohibited. Effective February 25, 2000, the APCD prohibited developmental burning of vegetative material within San Luis Obispo County. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. o. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20% opacity, and to prevent transport of dust offsite. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. p. When applicable, portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater, used during construction activities shall be registered with the California statewide portable equipment registration program (issued by the California Air Resources Board) or be permitted by the APCD. Such equipment may include: power screens, conveyors, internal combustion engines, crushers, portable generators, tub grinders, trammel screens, and portable plants (e.g, aggregate plant, asphalt plant, concrete plant). For more information, contact the SLOAPCD Engineering & Compliance Division at (805) 781-5912. AQ-2 The following measures shall be implemented to reduce expose of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans: a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non- California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: b. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, c. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. d. Maintain all construction equipment in proper tune according to manufacturer’s specifications; e. Fuel all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment with ARB certified motor vehicle diesel fuel (non- taxed version suitable for use off-road); f. Use diesel construction equipment meeting ARB's Tier 2 certified engines or cleaner off-road heavy-duty diesel engines, and comply with the State Off-Road Regulation; g. Idling of all on and off-road diesel-fueled vehicles shall not be permitted when not in use. Signs shall be posted in the designated queuing areas and or job site to remind drivers and operators of the no idling limitation. h. Electrify equipment when possible; i. Substitute gasoline-powered in place of diesel-powered equipment, when available; and, j. Use alternatively fueled construction equipment on-site when available, such as compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), propane or biodiesel. AQ-3 Prior to any grading activities a geologic evaluation shall be conducted to determine if naturally-occurring asbestos (NOA) is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. These requirements may include but are not limited to: Item 2 Packet Page 124 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 60 a. Development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan which must be approved by the SLOAPCD before operations begin, and, b. Development and approval of an Asbestos Health and Safety Program (required for some projects). If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the SLOAPCD. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos/noa.php. AQ-4 An odor-control plan shall be prepared for the project. The plan shall incorporate odor management practices to reduce odor-generation potential associated with onsite composting activities. Such practices shall include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Composting materials shall be turned on a frequent basis sufficient to maintain proper aeration. b. Moisture content of the composting materials shall be monitored to ensure consistent/proper moisture content. c. Ensure composting materials maintain an adequate mix of brown (e.g., paper) and green material. Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections, in coordination with the County of San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District, as necessary. Biological Resources BR-1 If tree removal or site disturbance is necessary during the fall and winter monarch butterfly migration (late October through February), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for monarch butterflies that could utilize trees on-site for overwintering. If monarch butterflies are detected in the work area or within 300 feet of the work area, tree removal shall be postponed until after the overwintering period or until a qualified biologist determines monarch butterflies are no longer utilizing the trees on or within 300 feet of the site for overwintering. BR-2 Vegetation removal shall be scheduled to occur outside the nesting bird season (February 15 to September 15), if feasible. If vegetation removal occurs between February 15 and September 15, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 2 weeks prior to disturbance to determine presence/absence of nesting birds within the disturbance area. If active nests are observed, vegetation removal shall be avoided within 100 feet of active passerine nests and 300 feet of active raptor nests until young birds have fledged and left the nest. The nests shall be monitored weekly by a biologist with experience with nesting birds. The buffer may be reduced if deemed appropriate by the biologist. If any federally or state-listed bird species or California fully protected bird species are observed nesting in or near the project area, the biologist and the City of San Luis Obispo shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife before any disturbances occur within 500 feet of the nest. Readily visible exclusion zones will be established in areas where nests must be avoided. The City of San Luis Obispo shall be contacted if any federally or state-listed bird species are observed during surveys. Bird nests, eggs, or young covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code shall not be moved or disturbed until the end of the nesting season or until young fledge, nor will adult birds be killed, injured, or harassed at any time. Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, nests of raptors (owls, hawks, falcons, eagles) shall not be removed prior to coordination with and approval from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. BR-3 The City of San Luis Obispo shall retain a biologist to conduct roosting bat surveys prior to any tree removal. Pre- disturbance surveys for bats shall include one daytime and one dusk survey no more than 30 days prior to the tree removal to determine if bats are roosting in the trees. The biologist(s) conducting the preconstruction surveys shall identify the nature of the bat utilization of the area (i.e., no roosting, night roost, day roost, maternity roost). If bats are found to be roosting in the trees to be removed, the City of San Luis Obispo shall delay the tree removal until the bats have left the area. Item 2 Packet Page 125 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 61 BR-4 Removal of the 40-inch diameter at breast height Monterey cypress tree located at the top-of-bank of Old Garden Creek shall be avoided, if feasible. If removal cannot feasibly be avoided, the City shall pursue a Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW prior to removing the tree. The following avoidance and minimization measures are anticipated to be included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement and are therefore incorporated into the proposed project per CEQA. Should any of these measures conflict with the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the Streambed Alteration Agreement shall take precedence over these measures. If any of the following measures are not included in the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the measures will be required in addition to the measures provided in the Streambed Alteration Agreement. Tree and vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank shall be prohibited during rain or within 24 hours following significant rainfall. Significant rainfall is defined as rainfall totaling one-half inch (0.5-inch) of rain in any 24-hour period. All vegetation removal within the top-of-bank shall be conducted during daylight hours. Prior to vegetation removal from within the top-of-bank, the City shall identify the limits of access routes and encroachment into the riparian area to the minimum disturbance required to conduct the vegetation removal. The “work area limits” shall be clearly marked in the field with highly visible flagging or fencing. The flagging or fencing shall be maintained in good repair for the duration of activities occurring in the top-of- bank. All areas beyond the identified work area limits shall be considered Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and shall not be disturbed. The aquatic areas within the creeks shall be avoided. Project a ctivities within the aquatic portions of the creeks are prohibited. No work within the channel of the creek shall occur. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct training sessions to familiarize all construction personal with the project conditions, limits of disturbance, special-status species with potential to occur in the work areas, general provisions and protections afforded by the state and federal endangered species acts, the Clean Water Act, Porter Cologne Water Quality Act, and California Fish and Game Code. The disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the minimum necessary to complete the project and shall only occur with the defined work areas. The disturbed portions of the stream bank shall be restored to as near their original condition as possible. Prior to initiation of project activities, all trees to be cut or removed shall be clearly identified and marked to avoid accidentally removing trees that should be avoided. The City shall document the number and species of all riparian woody-stemmed plants in excess of four (4) inches DBH that are cut, removed, or damaged during project activities within the top-of-bank. Riparian trees and shrubs with a DBH of four inches or greater that are damaged or removed shall be replaced by replanting appropriate native species at a 3:1 ratio (replaced to lost). The replacement trees/shrubs shall be maintained by the City for three years to ensure survival. If any of the replacement trees are lost, the lost trees shall be replaced. Staging and storage areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricant, and solvents shall be located at least 50- feet from the top-of-bank. All fueling and maintenance of vehicles or other equipment shall be prohibited outside of the designated staging and storage areas. Upon completion of construction, all disturbed soils shall be stabilized using generally-accepted erosion and sediment control practices such as crimped straw and seeds, jute netting, or other appropriate measures. If any mats or netting are used, said mats or netting shall contain only natural fiber materials. Nylon or other synthetic materials shall not be used in mats or netting. All disturbed areas shall be revegetated with riparian or upland vegetation, as appropriate. Item 2 Packet Page 126 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 62 All Project-generated debris, building materials, and rubbish shall be removed from the stream and from areas where such materials could be washed into the stream. BR-5 Prior to any ground disturbing activities, adequate protection measures (e.g., sturdy fencing), shall be installed to protect those trees identified on the final site plans to remain unharmed as well as to minimize impacts for those trees identified as being impacted. Protection measures shall remain in good working order during construction. BR-6 Prior to approval of construction permits, to minimize potential sedimentation within Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek, a sedimentation and erosion control plan shall be prepared that incorporates adequate best management practices to minimize the amount of sediment that would be deposited in Old Garden Creek and Stenner Creek. At a minimum, straw wattles (or comparably effective devices) shall be placed on the downslope sides of the proposed work which would direct flows into temporary sedimentation basins. During construction/improvements, the applicant shall check and maintain these measures regularly and after all larger storm events. All necessary remedial work and/or repairs shall be done immediately after the need for such work is identified. Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance. Cultural Resources CR-1 Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, an Archaeological Monitoring Plan shall be prepared. The Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. A list of personnel involved in the monitoring activities; b. Description of Native American involvement; c. Description of how the monitoring shall occur; d. Description of location and frequency of monitoring (e.g., full time, part time, spot checking); e. Description of what resources are expected to be encountered; f. Description of circumstances that would result in the halting of work at the project site; g. Description of procedures for halting work on the site and notification procedures; h. Description of monitoring reporting procedures; i. Description of notification of local Native American tribes in the event of a discovery; and j. Provide specific, detailed protocols for what to do in the event of the discovery of human remains. CR-2 The applicant shall retain a City-approved archaeologist and local Native American observer to monitor Project-related ground-disturbing activities that have the potential to encounter previously unidentified archaeological resources, as outlined in the Archaeological Monitoring Plan. Archaeological and tribal monitoring may cease only if the City- approved archaeologist determines in coordination with the City Project Manager, Community Development Director and the Native American monitor that Project activities do not have the potential to encounter and/or disturb unknown resources. CR-3 Prior to initial ground disturbance activities, the City-approved archaeologist shall conduct a brief construction worker awareness training for all construction personnel, pursuant to the approved Archaeological Monitoring Plan. This training shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: a. A detailed description of the potential types of archaeological resources that could be encountered during project excavations; b. The relevant environmental laws and penalties; c. Best management practices; d. Responsibilities of project personnel; and Item 2 Packet Page 127 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 63 e. Who to contact in the event of an inadvertent discovery, inclusive of local Native American tribes. CR-4 In the event that historical or archaeological remains are discovered during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and Community Development Director shall be notified. A qualified archaeologist shall conduct an assessment of the resources and formulate proper mitigation measures, if necessary. After the find has been appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume. CR-5 In the event that human remains are exposed during earth-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued and the City Project Manager and City Community Development Director shall be notified. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s construction plans. 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. Noise N-1 Prior to issuance of construction permits, the following measures shall be noted on all plans and implemented throughout the construction period: a. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational. b. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise-control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.). Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans for review and approval by the City Community Development Department. Compliance shall be verified by the City during regular inspections. Item 2 Packet Page 128 ER # EID-0321-2020 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2020 64 This page intentionally left blank. Item 2 Packet Page 129 MEMORANDUM Date: January 26, 2021 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner VIA: John Rickenbach/Rachel Cohen SUBJECT: ITEM 3 – Postponed to a date uncertain Development review of a Common Interest Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM 3136) and the development of 192 residential units, including 7 live/work units, 585 square feet of commercial space, 433 on-site parking spaces, and other residential community amenities on a 10.93-acre site located within the 231-acre Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) area with a request to allow live work units on the ground floor within the first 50 feet of floor area measured from the building face adjacent to a street and review of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The applicant has requested to postpone Planning Commission’s review of Bullock Ranch to a date uncertain to have more time to review and understand the conditions of approval required for the project. Item 3