HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7b. 500 Westmont Drive review of Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 Item 7b
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: 9/7/2021
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 90 Minutes
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kyle Van Leeuwen, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23
RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE WITHIN THE LOW -DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE (500 WESTMONT DRIVE)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, approving Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 to create twenty-three (23)
residential lots in the Low-Density (R-1) Zone and adopting the Associated Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Plan
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as represented in the staff
report and attachments dated September 7, 2021 (SBDV -0169-2020/EID-0170-2020,
500 Westmont Drive).”
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the proposed project, which is
a Tentative Tract Map (Attachment B) that would subdivide a 4.98 -acre parcel into 23
residential lots. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision is consistent with Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations, and applicable engineering standards. No residential
development is proposed at this time; however, recordation of the map would require the
installation of public improvements, including new roads, water, wastewater, and
stormwater infrastructure (Attachment C, Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan). The
Planning Commission has also recommended adoption of an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration, fulfilling requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) (Attachment D).
DISCUSSION
Background
The project proposes 23 residential lots on a 4.98-acre site zoned for residential use (R-
1). The proposed lots are consistent with the Subdivision Regulations standards for lot
size and dimensions and the proposed streets and other improvements are consis tent
with current engineering standards. No exceptions to the subdivision regulations are
proposed. The project site has a creek that crosses the western portion of the site.
Page 171 of 359
Item 7b
Lots have been proposed in an arrangement that allows for minimum 20-foot creek
setbacks to be applied to those lots adjacent to the creek (Lots 1-7) and allow for an
adequate buildable area outside those applied setbacks (Figure 1, Subdivision Design,
below). To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 native and non-native trees would
be removed, 51 of which are subject compensatory planting requirements in the R-1 zone.
Figure 1: Subdivision Design
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1.
The 4.98-acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont
Avenue and the northern terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existi ng
development on the project site includes two residential structures and associated
accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements. Vegetation on the property
includes a vegetated creek with associated riparian habitat that extends through the
western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of developed land, riparian
habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native trees throughout the
project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family homes, zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits,
zoned for Agricultural or Public Facility use.
East: Single- & multi-family homes, zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density (R-2).
South: Single-family homes, zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
Page 172 of 359
Item 7b
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On July 28, 2021, the Planning Commission (PC) recommended approval of the TTM to
the City Council (Attachment E, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes,
7-28-21). The PC had previously reviewed the project on May 26, 2021. The result of the
May 26th hearing was a motion to continue the item to allow for the completion of the 30 -
day public comment period on the draft environmental document, and to allow additional
information and clarifications to be incorporated that address public comments
(Attachment F, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 5 -26-21). As a
part of the PC’s recommendation to approve the project, the commission added one
additional condition requiring the applicant to prepare and implement a Construction
Communication Plan. The PC also asked City staff to provide the City Council with its
analysis of alternative traffic and circulation options, which is included in this report.
The Planning Commission’s recommendation incorporated the recommendations of the
City’s Tree Committee, which reviewed the project on May 17, 2021, for consistency with
the Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee recommended the PC find the proposed tree
removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations, with the inclusion of the
recommended condition of approval (COA #5) for compensatory planting (Attachment E,
Tree Committee Staff Report and Meeting Minutes).
Policy Context
The project is evaluated against the standards and limitations of the Subdivision
Regulations and General Plan policies. The project aligns with the housing production
Major City Goal because it will result in 23 lots for single-family residential development
from one existing property.
1. Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing
Element (HE) provide policies for the conservation and development of residential
neighborhoods. The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides
policies to preserve and protect natural resources on the project site. The project is
consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected
from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should
favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets
should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include
measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured
crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, bollards, and on -street
parking and sidewalks.
Page 173 of 359
Item 7b
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas
with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote
neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other
and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide
continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby community
facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial
areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that wo uld
increase cut-through traffic.
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development
provide bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent
with City plans and development standards. When evaluating transportation
impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks
and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards.
When evaluating transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of
Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools, parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic
by only connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut -
through traffic between other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision
design also incorporates a potential bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as
well as parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks (Figure 2, Subdivision Design
Circulation Connections).
Page 174 of 359
Item 7b
Figure 2: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new
residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where
physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new
neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing
the street layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways (see Figure 3 as example).
Figure 3: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
Page 175 of 359
Item 7b
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential
developments to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such
as landforms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and
plants.
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential
developments to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground
slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback
A. The following items should be no closer to the wetland or creek than the setback
line: buildings, streets, driveways, parking lots, above-ground utilities, and outdoor
commercial storage or work areas.
B. Development approvals should respect the separation from creek banks and
protection of floodways and natural features identified in part A above (buildings,
streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots
proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size (7,884 to 24,451 sf where 6,000 sf is
the standard minimum lot size in the R-1 zone) so that creek protection measures,
such as compliance with the applied 20-foot creek setback requirements, can be met
and still allow development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes no
development or grading activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek
and associated vegetation is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live
oaks, will be retained within the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native
species.
Page 176 of 359
Item 7b
Figure 4: Creek Corridor, tree #s in black within setbacks are retained
2. Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets
specific development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R -1 zone is
6,000 square feet with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet.
Lots are also required to have a minimum street frontage of 20 feet. All the lots within
the proposed subdivision meet these base requirements for size and dimension.
Additionally, the Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek banks
shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also
demonstrated compliance with this requirement. The Subdivision Regulations also call
for natural contours of the site to be preserved to the greatest extent possible in new
subdivisions and for lot lines to be generally perpendicular to the street (§16.18). The
design of the subdivision is consistent with these standards.
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per
Table 3 of the Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall
have a minimum area of 15% greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet
wider that otherwise required. Lot 19 does provide a width of no less than 60 feet,
consistent with this standard, but is less than 15% larger than the minimum lot area.
Page 177 of 359
Item 7b
Staff has included in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the area of
lot 19 to be increased to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation,
consistent with regulations standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving
the lot line between Lot 19 and lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot
20’s compliance with minimum lot size or dimension standards. Only minor changes
in site grading will be needed with this adjustment of lot lines.
3. Response to Planning Commission Direction
Traffic/Circulation
The Planning Commission directed staff to provide additional analysis of traffic and
circulation options for the project site. Four streets terminate into the project site,
including Westmont Avenue to the east and west, and Stanford and Cuesta Drives to
the south of the site. The project proposes to connect Stanford and Cuesta Drives,
which the City Transportation Division supports as the preferred option for this project
because it (a) funnels auto trips to Highland Drive where drivers can access Santa
Rosa Street (Highway 1) via the existing traffic signal, (b) minimizes potential for cut-
through traffic from Santa Rosa Street using existing local residential streets, (c)
improves emergency access for the proposed residences and existing homes on
Stanford and Cuesta (the existing dead -end streets make it difficult for SLO Fire to
access and turn around), and (d) this option is expected to maintain volumes and
speeds along Stanford and Cuesta that are within the neighborhood traffic thresholds
adopted in the General Plan Circulation Element for residentia l local streets.
Other circulation options considered, but not recommended due to policy
inconsistency, grading challenges, and property ownership limitations include:
Extend Westmont Ave East: Extend Westmont Avenue east of the project to
provide direct access to the new development, with no direct street
connection to Stanford or Cuesta
Connecting the new proposed lots to Westmont Avenue to the east would
increase the number of vehicles performing left-turn movements at the
unsignalized intersection of Santa Rosa (Highway 1)/Westmont
Avenue. Uncontrolled left-turns on high-speed roadways, such as Highway
1 (55 mph at Westmont), create higher potential for severe traffic collisions.
The City’s annual Traffic Safety Reports have documented this, whe re a
higher concentration of injury collisions for all users (autos, bikes,
pedestrians) tend to occur at locations on higher-speed streets without
dedicated left turn signals. Pursuant to the City’s adopted Vision Zero
Policy, Transportation staff would prefer to manage vehicular access for
new development in a manner that minimizes additional left turns at
uncontrolled, high-speed intersections.
Page 178 of 359
Item 7b
Additionally, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
maintains jurisdiction of Santa Rosa (Highway 1) within the vicinity of the
project. Caltrans would need to approve any proposals to modify the
intersection of Westmont/Highway 1 and should have the opportunity to
formally review any potential development proposals that would add more
auto trips to this intersection. While not related to this specific development
proposal, Caltrans submitted formal comments in February of 2020 as part
of the Cal Poly Master Plan Update EIR expressing concerns about a
proposal that would have increased auto traffic at a similar unsignalized
intersection to the north (Stenner Creek Road/Highway 1)—in these
comments, Caltrans specifically noted that they were not supportive of
installing a traffic signal or roundabout at that intersection. While a more
detailed warrant analysis would be required if considering signalizing the
Westmont/Highway 1 intersection, upon initial review by transportation staff
this intersection does not appear to meet warrants with or without the
additional traffic contemplated by this development if connected to
Westmont Ave to the east.
If Westmont Avenue (east) was extended to connect with the proposed
project and with the existing segments of Cuesta and/or Stanford Drive , this
could increase potential for cut-through traffic from Santa Rosa St.
(Highway 1) through the existing neighborhood. This would not only worsen
the potential issue of left-hand movements stated above but would also
create a new vehicle route that many of the residential lots to the northeast
of the site could utilize. This would conflict with Land Use Element Policy
2.2.4 sited above, which states that connections to existing streets should
not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic.
Extend Westmont Avenue West: Extend Westmont Avenue west of the
project to provide direct access to the new development, with no direct street
connection to Stanford or Cuesta
If Westmont Avenue to the west were extended to provide access to the
newly proposed lots, construction of a bridge crossing would be required,
which would impact the on-site creek. This conflicts with many General Plan
goals and policies to preserve creeks1.
1 Land Use Element:
Community Goal #4. Protect, sustain, and where it has been degraded, enhance wildlife habitat on land surrounding
the city, at Laguna Lake, along creeks and other wetlands, and on open hills and ridges within the city, so that
diverse, native plants, fish, and animals can continue to live within the area.
Community Goal #7. Protect and restore natural landforms and features in and near the city, such as the volcanic
morros, hillsides, marshes, and creeks.
Policy 2.3.10. Site Constraints. The City shall require new residential developments to respect site constraints such
as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
Page 179 of 359
Item 7b
If Westmont Avenue to the west were extended to provide access to the
newly proposed lots and connected to any of the other streets (i.e., Jeffrey
Drive), a “cut-through” route for traffic would also be provided to the existing
residential lots to the northwest. This would conflict with Land Use Element
Policy 2.2.4 sited above, which states that connections to existing street s
should not be done in a method that would increase cut-through traffic.
Connecting Stanford and Cuesta Drives is seen as the best option for the project for
the following reasons:
1. The existing street widths on Cuesta and Stanford Drive, as well as the
proposed new connection between the two, are consistent with City
Engineering Standards for local residential streets.
2. The connection of the two streets improves access for emergency services
and larger commercial vehicles (i.e., garbage trucks, delivery trucks, etc.),
where there is currently no appropriate turnaround where Cuesta and
Stanford dead end (there is a small cul-de-sac near the end of Stanford
Drive, but it does not meet the minimum width needed per current SLO Fire
and City Engineering Standards). With the two streets connected, residents
in the area will have a second means of evacuation, and emergency vehicle
response is improved.
3. The connection of Cuesta Drive or Stanford Drives does not create a new
“cut-through” route for other existing residential areas looking to access to
or from Highway 1.
4. Stanford and Cuesta Drive each carry approximately 200 -300 vehicles per
day currently and have prevailing auto speeds of under 25 mph. The
maximum neighborhood traffic thresholds for a residential local street per
the General Plan Circulation Element are 1,500 vehicles per day and
speeds of 25 mph or less. The proposed development is anticipated to
generate approximately 220 new daily auto trips. Even under a worst-case
assumption where 100% of the newly created auto traffic used only Cuesta
Drive or Stanford Drive, the resulting worst-case daily traffic volumes would
still be well under the max threshold established for residential local streets
in the Circulation Element. The worst-case result would be approximately
520 vehicle trips per day, where the max threshold for the street is 1,500
vehicle trips per day.
Page 180 of 359
Item 7b
The evaluation of the proposed street patterns for the project included analysis of Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT), consistency with the Circulation Element, potential hazards due to
a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and emergency access. This analysis
by City Planning and Public Works/Transportation concludes that there are no significant
impacts related to transportation and traffic pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) (Attachment D, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) and no
inconsistencies with the City’s Circulation Element. For these reasons, staff does not
recommend modifications to the project’s current street design and connections to
existing streets.
Public Engagement
Consistent with the City's Public Engagement and Noticing (PEN) Manual and the City's
Municipal Code, the project was noticed per the City's notification requirements for
Development Projects including Tentative Tract Maps for each public hearing associated
with the project. Newspaper legal advertisements were posted in the New Times ten days
prior to the hearing. While post card noticing was sent late for the Planning Commission
hearing on May 26th, the postcards for the second de novo Planning Commission hearing
and the September 7, 2021, City Council meeting were sent to both tenants and owners
of properties located within 300 feet of the project site ten days before the hearing. Email
notifications to individuals that provided digital correspondence has also been provided.
CONCURRENCE
The proposed project has been reviewed by the Community Develo pment Department
(Planning, Building, and Engineering), Public Works Department (Transportation),
Utilities Department, Fire Department, and the City’s Sustainability and Natural Resource
Officer and Biologist. Staff comments provided during review of the proposed project are
incorporated into the presented evaluation and conditions of approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). An Initial Study -Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and
circulated from April 29, 2021, through June 29, 2021 (Attachment D, Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration). The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has
been updated in certain areas in connection and in response to public comments received
prior to the July 28, 2021, Planning Commission hearing. These areas of evaluation, such
as Biological Resources and Hydrology and Water Quality, are further discussed in
Attachment E (Planning Commission Staff Repot and Minutes, July 28, 2021). These
modifications do not require recirculation of the IS/MND because the edits constitute
minor modifications and clarifications to an adequate MND and do not include significant
new information that would result in a new significant environmental impact or a
substantial increase in the severity of a significant environmental impact.
Page 181 of 359
Item 7b
Within the Initial Study document all new text is indicated by underlined, bold, and
italicized text. Deleted text is indicated by strike-through (Attachment D). The applicant
has agreed to all mitigation measures proposed specific to this project , which would
reduce all identified significant impacts to less than significant, and these measures are
incorporated into the Draft Resolution (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes/No Budget Year: 2021-2022
Funding Identified: Yes/No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Total N/A $ $ $
When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis,
which found that overall, the General Plan was fiscally balance d. Since the project does
not propose to change the General Plan designation of the site, it has a neutral fiscal
impact.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Deny the Tentative Tract Map # 3157. Staff does not recommend this alternative,
because the project complies with the City' s Subdivision Regulations and Zoning
Regulations and would help meet the City' s housing objectives. An action denying
the application should include findings that cite the basis for denial and should
reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations, Zoning
Regulations or other policy documents, and make findings required by the Housing
Accountability Act (California Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(1)) that the project
either results in a “specific, adverse impact” and “there is no feasible method to
satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.”
2. Continue the item. The Council may continue its review of the project if additional
information is needed to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction
should be provided to staff so that it can be presented at that subsequent hearing. The
Council may direct staff and the applicant to make specific changes to the project. The
Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (California Government Code Section 95905.5(a)) limits
the number of public hearings a city can conduct if a housing development project
complies with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards . A motion
to continue this item would allow for one additional hearing by The Council, and only
one additional hearing, before the limit of five hearings is reached.
Page 182 of 359
Item 7b
ATTACHMENTS
A – Draft Resolution approving Tentative Tract Map 3157 and Mitigated Negative
Declaration
B – Planning Commission Resolution PC-1042-21 (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020)
C – Tentative Tract Map 3157 and Phasing Plan
D – Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration of impacts of TTM 3157
E – Planning Commission Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes, 7-28-21
F – Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 5-26-21
G – Tree Committee Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, 7-17-21
Page 183 of 359
Page 184 of 359
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2021 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
3157 TO CREATE TWENTY-THREE (23) RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE
LOW-DENSITY (R-1) ZONE AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PLAN PURSUANT TO
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
SEPTEMBER 7, 2021 (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020, 500
WESTMONT DRIVE)
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a web
based public hearing on May 17, 2021, recommending the Planning Commission find the
project consistent with the Tree Regulations Ordinance with recommended conditions,
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo
Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
web based public hearing on May 26, 2021, and continued the review of the project to a
future date, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV -0169-2020 and EID-0170-
2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, on July 28, 2021,
pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo
Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo
recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map 3157, as conditioned, and recommended
the adoption of an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) associated with
the project, pursuant to said application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public
hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, on
September 7, 2021, for the purpose of considering Tentative Tract Map 3157, subdividing
an approximately 4.98-acre site into 23 residential lots, and for the purpose of considering
an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed
tentative tract map, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and a proceeding
instituted under SBDV-0169-2020 and EID-0170-2020; 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; and
Page 185 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 2
R _____
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the
manner required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council approve the project (SBDV-0169-2020,
& EID-0170-2020), 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 surrounding
neighborhoods.
2. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the General Plan because:
a. The Land Use Element provides that the purpose of the Low-Density
Residential land use designation is to provide for single family detached
dwellings, which the subdivision is designed and intended to accommodate,
and complies with the maximum density limit of seven density units per
acre.
b. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4,
Circulation Element Policy 5.1.3, and Housing Element Policy 7.3 because
the design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from
intrusive traffic by avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between other
existing neighborhoods and Highway 1 and by incorporating a potential
bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on -
street parking, and sidewalks with proposed streets.
c. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.5 because the
design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by
continuing the street layout of Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive, including
street width, sidewalks, and parkways.
d. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 4.2.1 because the
project respects the separation from creek banks by identifying the
dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots proposed
adjacent to the creek are a larger size (24,451 to 7,884 square feet) so that
creek protection measures, such as compliance with creek setback
requirements, can be met and still allow residential development within the
created parcels. The project also proposes no development or g rading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated
vegetation is most prominent and established.
Page 186 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 3
R _____
e. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policy 6.8 because the
project will facilitate residential infill development.
f. The project is consistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy
7.7.9 because building envelopes, streets, and driveways, are separated
from the creek by the inclusion of a 20-foot creek setback applied to the
project for such improvements, even though the onsite creek is not subject
to creek setback standards.
3. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision because the project has
demonstrated that development of the proposed lots can be achieved in compliance
with the setback standards of the Zoning Regulations, which are intended to help
provide air circulation and exposure to sunlight.
4. As conditioned, the subdivision and associated tree remo vals are consistent with the
City’s Tree Regulations because the project will be required to provide compensatory
tree plantings at a rate consistent with Municipal Code requirements with a size and
species of tree found to be appropriate by the Tree Committee.
5. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are not likely to cause
serious health problems or substantial environmental damage since further
development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the
City’s Development Standards, Engineering Standards, Mitigation Measures, and
Conditions of Approval.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby adopts the proposed
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) of Environmental Impact, based on
incorporation of the following mitigation measures, which will reduce potential
environmental impacts to less than significant.
Air Quality
AQ -1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel
vehicles, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road
Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet
of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be
permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever
possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and
enforced at the construction site.
Page 187 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 4
R _____
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall
comply with 13 CCR 2485. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled
commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more
than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operatio n on highways. It applies
to California- and non-California-based vehicles. In general, the
regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles:
a. 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
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to
power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that
vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater
than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a
restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the
regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind
drivers of the 5-minute idling limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in
the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ -2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-
disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate matter
control measures and detail each measure on the project grading and building
plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to
prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the
SLOAPCD’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 miles per hour (mph). Reclaimed
(non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with
tarps or other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as
possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than
1 month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-
invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized
using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other met hods
approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
Page 188 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 5
R _____
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed
as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as
possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on
any unpaved surface at the construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical
distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or
agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor vehicles and/or
equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street
as described in CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC)
Section 13304. To prevent track out, designate access points and
require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Insta ll
and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and
exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-out prevention device
can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at
preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved
area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need
periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-
out soils, the track-out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried
onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with
reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre -wetted prior to
sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and
building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose
responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust emissions do not result in a
nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures
as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions
below the SLOAPCD’s limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in
any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend
periods when work may not be in progress (for example, win d-blown
dust could be generated on an open dirt lot). 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
(Contact Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ -3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the
applicant shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of
the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full compliance with
SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic
Page 189 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 6
R _____
evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community Development Department
upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not
have the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM
exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ -4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to
be present onsite, proposed earthwork, demoliti on, and construction activities
shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions
regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying,
and Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipu lated in
the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code
of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos). These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities
commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and
requirements for identified NOA.
AQ -5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the
applicant shall provide an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified
asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working
days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to
SLOAPCD of such work. The notification shall include an asbestos report that
was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM removal and disposal shall
follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project
grading/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 SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of
Cambria morning glory on the project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a
Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria morning glory
and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a
component of the program, seed shall be collected from C ambria morning glory
plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading activities. Using
standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until
the receiving sites shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180
square-feet in size outside of the development area (as designated on the site
Page 190 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 7
R _____
plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that
will be maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than
June 1 each year. The areas will be maintained as grassland habitat and no
planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as grazing
activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice
the size as the areas currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180
square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square -feet of habitat impacted). This
equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a
minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four
occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and stored for top-dressing the
mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation
site should be prepared for planting by removal of non -native species or other
measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil has
been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand -
broadcasted into suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with
compost. Seed may also be incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix
described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure
BIO-9 and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control
effort. Depending on the season when construction starts, the qualified botanist
may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig them up when soils are moist) and
transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are ready
for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management
measures for 5 years to ensure no net loss of Cambria morning glory
onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring
by a qualified botanist shall occur during the spring growing season (between
April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of planted
propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of
no net loss of the species onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at
least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300 Cambria morning
glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess
the areal cover of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established
occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately 300 plants covering
1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of
monitoring, remedial actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in
suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding additional year of
monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation
effort could include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to
reduce competition, additional seed application, or supplemental irrigation during
periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare annual reports
for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort an d
monitoring effort. The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to
the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each year) for the 5 -year
monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
Page 191 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 8
R _____
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The
burrowing owl has been recorded in the vicinity of the project from October to the
end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for the tract
improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this
species would be avoided and no further mitigation would be required.
Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to avoid or
minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure
BIO-9). If initial grading work must commence during the time period that
burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys for this species
shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior
to vegetation removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas
occupied by special-status wildlife species until relocated or they have left
the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-
disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by
the City shall survey the project impact area to identify whether nesting birds,
roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering populations, obscure bumble bee,
and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be
conducted for any phase of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10
days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure demolition conducted prior
to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate survey techniques
for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to
occur onsite. For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or wildlife
cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and cover
objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat
roost sites shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey
remains. If any of these species are found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate
with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful
relocation of individuals to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may
recommend creating structures for displaced woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls
can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or occupied burrows can be
avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites
by placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for night-time
foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on the
results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in
coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status
animal species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may
proceed with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO -5
through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to
any vegetation removal or tract improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare
a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project
personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on
Page 192 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 9
R _____
biological resources. It shall include a description of special-status species
potentially occurring on the project site and their natural history, the status of the
species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take
should a special-status species be found on the project site. Other aspects of the
training shall include a description of general measures to protect wildlife,
including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points,
and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked
on the project site for one or more overnight periods shall be either
securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife
before the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls
of silt fence, for wildlife that may have sheltered under or within the
materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than
6 inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions
should any wildlife species be detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when
necessary, to meet air quality standards and protect biological
resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers,
cans, bottles, food scraps), small construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of
metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly
basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance
sheet. The program shall be repeated for any new crews that arrive
subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to
delineate the allowable work area, exclude wildlife from the site, and
protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements,
and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1 -7, a high-visibility
construction fence at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved
wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along the creek corridor to delineate the
limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a
minimum. In no case shall ground disturbance occur within the riparian habitat
or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from regulatory
Page 193 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 10
R _____
agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and
silt fence (i.e., ERTEC Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would
serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation, wildlife exclusion, and
siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction
personnel for needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the
property is cleared and graded, and structures are removed. A qualified
biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and vegetation that
may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards,
and bat roosting sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are
removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any special-status species are
found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or
CDFW shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the
overwintering season. Vegetation removal within the riparian area shall be
conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late
October through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through
January) to avoid disturbance to species potentially inhabiting riparian
vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The
following erosion and sedimentation control BMPs are required to be
implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot
construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be
minimized by scheduling construction to occur outside of the rainy
season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15.
Adherence to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the
burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be
restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated
staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot
construction, a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by
a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion control
blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate
techniques should be employed to protect the drainage features on and
off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall
be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have
appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection BMPs
installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and erosion control
measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the
initiation of site grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
Page 194 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 11
R _____
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall
be in place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 fe et of wetland
areas, riparian habitat and/or drainage features, and refueling areas
shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these
areas unless drip pans or ground covers are used. All equipment and
vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction
staging areas shall be located in a location where spills would not drain
into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an
appropriate containment system. Washing of equipment, tools, etc.
should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could enter
onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in
compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations. All uses of such
compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food
and Agriculture, and other state and federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the
project site should be cleaned up immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls
and other stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion
potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall
be implemented to prevent erosion and sedimentation. Biotechnical
approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the
project engineer in consultation with a qualified restoration ecologist as
detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas to
blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged
topsoil containing native seedbank from the site, and/or applying the
native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed mix shall
be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either
direct hand seeding or hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native
erosion control seed mix should be provided on all disturbed soil areas
prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Page 195 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 12
R _____
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species
Application
Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus
carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa
pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium
wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia
microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a
compensatory mitigation program, and monitor the success of the
program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other waters
on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance
within the areas delineated as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic
Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide documentation to the
City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act
Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and
Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from
CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory agencies
to not be required.
Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean
Water Act, City of San Luis Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements,
and If regulatory permits are required, prior to the initiation of vegetation removal
or tract improvements, the applicant shall retain a qualified biological monitor to
ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act and CDFW permit requirements
during work adjacent to the creek. The monitor shall be present during the
installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits of work in relation to
the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory
compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer, the monitor shall
direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian
habitat during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during
construction of the rip rap pad and any other work within the creek setback area
on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal of non -native
tree species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies,
the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to the City and the biological monitor
shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
Page 196 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 13
R _____
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement
protecting riparian area: A Biological Easement and Biological Easement
Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation. The
easement agreement shall be developed by the applic ant in a format provided
by the City. The following activities are permitted within the biological easement,
subject to the review and approval by the City Sustainability and Natural
Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement.
Creek setback standards shall be applied to the easement area, consistent with
municipal code requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and
all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and
Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that
historical or archaeological remains are discovered during ground -disturbing
activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be
issued, and the City 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. These requirements shall
be noted on the project’s final map and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed
during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt
work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall
be notified. California 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 PRC Section 5097.98.
If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall
notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These
requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and 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.
Page 197 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 14
R _____
Noise
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following
BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60
dBA at the project boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern
noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.)
used for project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically
powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-
air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended
noise abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine
enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals
to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices
(e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all
construction noise BMP, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at
construction entry sites prior to commencement of construction and maintained
throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction workers shall
be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how,
why, and where BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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 . Tribal
Cultural Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the
Salinan Tribe shall be notified prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide
for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25 -foot radius of the
find shall cease and the City shall be notified immediately consistent with the
requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Page 198 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 15
R _____
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction
permit, the applicant shall provide a vegetation/fuel management plan prepared
by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot. The plan
shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and
trimming, to increase defensible space around residential structures and
driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate standards for
installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and
fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the
following fire reduction methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection
Report (Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material
which becomes a receptive fuel bed for embers and sparks and can then
transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain
gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not
allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non -combustible
fences and decks in the subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant
landscaping in the back yards of the subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire -rated, flame and ember
resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the
creek, riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches
in height all around the northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall
shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-foot
setback at the west side of the creek and shall continue beginning at the
20-foot setback at the east side of the creek, terminating at the property
line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of this wall is to interrupt fire
progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing
the very desirable view of the open space.
Page 199 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 16
R _____
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on
all grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall
verify compliance through initial and regular inspections.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby approves of the common interest
subdivision and project design with the incorporation of appropriate conditions. 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 City Council grants final approval, subject to the following
conditions:
Planning Division
1. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall label lots one through seven, sixteen,
and eighteen through twenty-three as “sensitive sites”. This status ensures that future
site development will respect existing site constraints, creek setback requirements,
privacy of occupants and neighbors of the project and be compatible with the scale
and character of the surrounding neighborhood. Prior to submittal of a building permit
application, development of these sensitive parcels shall require architectural review,
in accordance with Municipal Code Section 2.48.
2. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall state that lots one through seven are
subject to creek setback standards and requirements, consistent with Municipal Code
Section 17.70.030.
3. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall increase the lot size of lot 19 to be no
less than 6,900 square feet by reducing the size of lot 20, which shall be no less than
6,000 square feet, consistent with Subdivision Regulations requirem ents for corner
lots.
4. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement
required by mitigation measure BIO-11. This easement shall include all the area
between the creek top of bank, current riparian area, or replanted areas which are
planned directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline of the
creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for Cambria morning glory
replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
5. Plans submitted for public improvements or grading of lots shall identify all trees
proposed for removal, their diameter at breast height, and the location of
compensatory tree planting. Compensatory tree planting shall be provided at a rate
of one-to-one for all onsite trees removed, or otherwise consistent with Municipal
Code Standards, unless the tree being removed is exempt from tree removal
permitting by Municipal Code section 12.24.090 (C.1.). Measurements of tree
diameters shall be consistent with forestry best practices, to the satisfaction of the
City Arborist. Compensatory tree plantings shall be an equal mix of 15-gallon and 24-
inch box size and consist of at least 50% native tree species. All compensatory trees
shall be irrigated and maintained by the property owner or subdivider until the tree is
established or the individual lot is sold.
Page 200 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 17
R _____
6. Plans submitted for public improvements shall include a Construction Communication
Plan. This plan shall specify how and when existing residents adjacent to the project
will be notified about the schedule for grading and construction activities. Notification
of the project schedule should include all residences within a 300 -foot radius of the
project site and all residences on Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development - Subdivision Conditions
7. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and
monumentation shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations,
Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S.
Customary Units in accordance with the current City Engineering Standards. A
separate application, checklist, and final map review fee shall be paid at the time of
final map processing.
8. The map and improvement plans shall be tied to the City’s vertical and horizontal
control network in accordance with the City Engineering Standards. Depending upon
the location of existing vertical control benchmark(s), a new benchmark may need to
be established within or adjoining the subdivision.
9. The final map submittal and improvement plans shall include a current title report.
An electronic copy of the title report with embedded links to referenced documents is
preferred. If not available, the submittal shall include a copy of each of the perti nent
referenced documents.
10. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new single family dwelling lot prior to map
recordation. The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of final
map submittal. Credit for the removal of the exist ing residence will be applied to the
final fee.
11. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded
separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided
for in part or in total as blanket easements.
12. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility
easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. This easement shall be clearly
shown on the final map submittal. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous
with all public right-of-way lines bordering each lot.
13. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and
maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded
separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided
for in part or in total as blanket easements.
Page 201 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 18
R _____
14. The final map shall include a public path easement connection from Westmont (east)
if attainable to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public
Works Director. The easement definition of either a public pedestrian or bikeway
easement shall be confirmed with the City prior to map recordation and in concert
with the subdivision improvement plans.
15. A creek/biological open space easement shall be s hown and noted on the map in
accordance with the mitigation measures. A creek maintenance Easement
Agreement, in a format approved by the City shall be recorded prior to or concurrent
with the recordation of the map. The agreement shall further clarify t he creek
maintenance responsibility and limits of improvements allowed within the creek
corridor. The agreement shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City’s
Sustainability and Natural Resources Official and Community Development Director.
16. The relocation, extinguishment, or quitclaim of any existing easements shall be
clearly identified on the final map or shall be completed separately prior to map
recordation if applicable.
17. The final map shall show and label the limits of the calculated 100 -year flood event.
The information may be included on an additional map sheet.
18. The project soils report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the
subdivision regulations. The soils engineer shall verify whether additional boring(s)
or exploratory trenching is required to cover the portions of the subdivision located
under the existing developed site. The final report shall complete the analysis and
any final recommendation regarding the potential for liquefaction.
19. The plans, map, and supporting documents shall show and note compliance with the
City’s Drainage Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post
Construction Stormwater Regulations.
20. Stormwater Control Measures (SCM’s) and piping within the public right -of-way
should be limited to the minimum extent feasible. All SCM’s shall be the maintenance
responsibility of the HOA or private property owners. SCM’s that are located within
the public right-of-way will require the recordation of an Encroachment Agreement in
a format provided by the City. The agreement shall be recorded in conjunction the
map recordation.
21. The stormwater strategy and subdivision improvement plans shall consider the
requirement for permanent irrigation to any bioremediation SCM’s. The irrigation
system could be provided from the adjoining domestic meter located along the lot
frontage. A common landscape meter could be provided at the commercial meter
water impact fee rate. Private service piping located within the public right-of-way
will require the recordation of an encroachment agreement. Cross-connection control
may be required for all future domestic meters for lots that are crossed with a private
common irrigation service.
Page 202 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 19
R _____
22. An Operation and Maintenance Manual and recorded Private Stormwater
Conveyance Agreement will be required as part of the Stormwater Control Plan
approval and map recordation.
23. The final map submittal shall include CCR’s to define the maintenance responsibility
of the several private and/or shared facilities.
24. All existing structures, private water supply, or private waste disposal system shall
be demolished or abandoned to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, Building
Official, and County Health Department with proper permits prior to map recordation.
Existing structures or improvements may remain if specifically approved, are not
considered to be a nuisance or health hazard, and are shown to not be affected by
the proposed location of property lines and/or improvements.
25. The subdivision improvement plan submittal shall include the standard application,
checklist, engineer’s estimate of probable cost, a plan review fee/retainer, and all
supporting documents.
26. All new on-site and off-site subdivision improvements shall comply with the City
Engineering Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of
subdivision plan approval.
27. The street paving shall comply with City Engineering Standards. If construction
phasing of the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing sh all provide for the
ultimate structural street section and pavement life per standard #7110. The
engineer of record shall detail this requirement in the public improvement plans, to
the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
28. The improvement plans shall clearly show and label the existing rights-of-way, street
improvements, and utility infrastructure located at the subdivision boundaries and
points of connection to Westmont (east), Cuesta, Stanford, and Westmont (west).
29. The transitions from the several sidewalk connections from the adjoining
neighborhood 4’ wide sidewalks to the new 5’ detached sidewalks and 6’ walking
path shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to map recordation. Limited off -site
sidewalk improvements may be required for the transitions and for the connection to
ADA compliant and competent material.
30. Sidewalk extensions and or terminations at the Westmont connections to the
subdivision shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to final map
recordation. Unless otherwise approved for deferral or waiver by the Public Works
Department, the through connection from Westmont (east) will require a continuation
of the sidewalk along the street end to provide an accessible connection to the 6’
walking path.
Page 203 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 20
R _____
31. Westmont street termination improvements, storm drain capture, and utility
connections may require the removal of the existing parkway street tree. A
compensatory parkway tree may be required prior to final map recordation.
32. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the proposed pathway
connection from Westmont (east) to Cuesta in compliance with City and ADA
standards unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. Ramps and
landings may be required if the slope can’t be reduced to walkway gradien ts.
Handrails, if required may need to include a non -skateboard feature or may need to
be attached to a guardrail, fence, or other barrier to discourage the establishment of
a skateable feature.
33. The improvement plans shall show the location of a Mail Box Unit (MBU’s) per City
Engineering Standards and the approval of the Post Master. Unless otherwise
approved by the City, the MBU(s) shall be located outside of the public right -of-way.
A separate easement may need to be included on the map.
34. The subdivision plans shall show water, sewer, gas, electrical, phone, and cable
connections to each lot. Any proposal for the elimination of a gas main and/or gas
services shall be approved by the City and supplying utility company.
35. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the final line and grade of all
sewer, water, and storm drain lines to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Utility
Departments. Utility separations shall be provided for all new and existing systems
unless a design exception is approved by the City and State, if applicable.
36. The utility plan shall include water services and meters to each lot. The service may
be provided as individual services or could be provided as a “U-branch” at the
common property line per City Engineering Standard #6260 and to the satisfaction of
the Utilities Department.
37. Unless specifically approved by the Building Official, and the directors of Community
Development, Public Works, and Utilities, the sewer service to Lots 1, 2, and 3 shall
be gravity sewers. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to provide a
gravity sewer to each of the lots to either Westmont, Stanford, or through an
easement to Jeffrey. If sewer ejectors are required for one or more lots, a Notice of
Requirements shall include this item and shall be recorded in conjunction with the
final map.
38. Fire Hydrants shall be provided per City Engineering Standards. The final placement
shall consider the hydrant availability and distance from the tract boundary at all four
tract interfaces with the adjoining public streets. Off -site hydrants may be required.
Final hydrant locations and spacing shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire
Department and Utilities Department prior to final map recordation.
Page 204 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 21
R _____
39. A preliminary electrical service design/memo from PGE shall be provided prior to
approval of the subdivision improvement plans. The final PGE design/handout
package may be listed as a deferred submittal item on the cover sheet of the
improvement plans. Service to the subdivision shall be completed without a net
increase in the number of service poles located within the public right of way.
40. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall install street lighting and all
associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing,
wiring, and luminaires per City Engineering Standards. Off -site street lighting
improvements, alterations, or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to
and from the proposed development to com plete the necessary public improvements.
41. Improvement plans shall include a complete tree summary show the diameter and
species of all trees. The plan shall clarify the trees to remain and the trees to be
removed. Trees to remain may require a tree preservation plan per City Engineering
Standards.
42. Prior to recordation of the final map, invasive plant species shall be removed or
eradicated along and within the Twin Ridge Creek corridor to the satisfaction of the
Planning Division and Sustainability and Natural Resources Official.
43. Agency permits required for any work within the creek corridor shall be secured prior
to commencing with any demolitions, grading, and construction within the
jurisdictional areas. Any jurisdictional permits from the Army Corp, Fish and Wildlife,
or Regional Water Quality Control Board required for the drainage, site
improvements, street and road improvements shall be issued prior to plan approval
and/or commencing with work within the respective waterways. Permit conditions
shall be reflected on the approved subdivision plans.
44. A SWPPP and Waste Discharger Identification Number (WDID) shall be issued and
referenced on the grading, erosion control, and stormwater control plan sheets prior
to plan approval and encroachment permit issuance.
45. The grading and drainage plan and reports shall clarify the limit of run-on from the
adjoining public streets and from any upslope private watershed. The upslope
watershed to the north (Cal Fire) shall be evaluated for the capacity of the current
drainage systems. The systems shall be shown t o be adequate to carry the design
storm, shall be upgraded, or subdivision improvements added to collect and convey
any run-on.
46. Prior to final map recordation, all proposed retaining walls shall be evaluated for
collecting and conveying any surface run-on that might be tributary to the back of
wall. Any concentrated drainage shall be conveyed and discharged in a non-erosive
manner.
Page 205 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 22
R _____
47. The proposed pad grades shall provide a minimum surface drainage design gradient
from a defined high point(s) to an appro ved drainage outlet. The pad grading and
drainage plan and build-out strategy shall not rely on subsurface drainage systems
without a safe overflow.
48. The proposed slope banks shall honor the top and toe of slope setbacks from the
adjoining property lines in accordance with the California Building Code unless
captured with a retaining wall or curb. Pad grading and drainage improvements plans
should consider the final grading and drainage proposed for the typical lot
development.
49. Street trees are required as a condition of development. The proposed trees may be
planted in conjunction with the subdivision improvements or could be deferred to
individual lot development. The proposed parkway planting or bio -remediation
improvements shall consider and honor the requirement for parkway tree planting at
the rate of approximately one tree per every 35 lineal feet of frontage.
Utilities Department
50. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design
standards effective at the time the permit for public improvement is obtained and shall
have reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along
public roads.
51. Any private sewer lateral improvement included with public improvement plans that
cross one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide evidence that a
private utility easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior to
issuance of a permit for such improvement.
52. Public improvement plans submitted shall show all utility easements dedicated to the
City in compliance with the latest engineering design standards and shall have
reasonable alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure.
53. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the existing terminal manhole in
Cuesta Drive to be abandoned and a new cleanout manhole shall be installed
upstream of the sewer lateral connection for Lot 16. The proposed sewer lateral for
Lot 16 shall connect to the new 6” sewer main extension downstream of the cleanout
manhole with a wye.
54. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the proposed public sewer main
extension and manhole in Westmont Avenue to be 6” PVC pipe and meet current
City Engineering Standards.
55. Public improvement plans submitted shall show water meters and private sewer
laterals with appropriate clearance from one another per City Standards.
Page 206 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 23
R _____
56. Public improvement plans submitted shall show a separate water meter provided for
each new parcel per Chapter 13.04.120 of the City’s Municipal Code.
57. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading
and dust control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of
the City’s Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction
Water Permit program.
58. The proposed 8” public water main within Stanford Drive shall meet the current City
Standards at the time of building permit submittal and shall maintain a minimum 12”
clearance above the proposed public sewer main, per City Standards.
Page 207 of 359
Resolution No. ____ (2021 Series) Page 24
R _____
Indemnification
59. 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 Indemnifie d Claim
and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim .
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by
_______________________, and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 20 21.
________________________________
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, on ______________________.
________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Page 208 of 359
RESOLUTION NO. PC-1042-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3157
TO CREATE TWENTY-THREE (23) RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE LOW-
DENSITY (R-1) ZONE (SBDV-0169-2020/EID-0170-2020)
WHEREAS, the Tree Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting was conducted
via teleconference on May 17, 2021, recommending the Planning Commission find the project
consistent with the Tree Regulations Ordinance, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under SBDV-
0169-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo meeting was conducted
via teleconference May 26, 2021, continued the review of the project to a future date, pursuant to
a proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust, applicant ;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 990 Palm Street, on July 28, 2021, pursuant to a
proceeding instituted under SBDV-0169-2020, and EID-0170-2020, Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; 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.
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 (SBDV-0169-2020, & EID-0170-2020), 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 surrounding neighborhoods.
2. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan because:
Page 209 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 2
a. The Land Use Element provides that the purpose of the Low-Density Residential
land use designation is to provide for single family detached dwellings, which the
subdivision is designed and intended to accommodate, and complies with the
maximum density limit of seven density units per acre.
b. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policies 2.2.3 and 2.2.4,
Circulation Element Policy 5.1.3, and Housing Element Policy 7.3 because the
design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic
by avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between other existing
neighborhoods and Highway 1 and by incorporating a potential bicycle and
pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on-street parking, and
sidewalks with proposed streets.
c. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.5 because the design of
the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the street
layout of Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways.
d. The project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 4.2.1 because the project
respects the separation from creek banks by identifying the dimensions of the creek
and existing riparian area. The lots proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size
(24,451 to 7,884 square feet) so that creek protection measures, such as compliance
with creek setback requirements, can be met and still allow residential development
within the created parcels. The project also proposes no development or grading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated
vegetation is most prominent and established.
e. The project is consistent with Housing Element Policy 6.8 because the project will
facilitate residential infill development.
3. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision because the project has demonstrated that
development of the proposed lots can be achieved in compliance with the setback standards
of the Zoning Regulations, which are intended to help provide air circulation and exposure to
sunlight.
4. As conditioned, the subdivision and associated tree removals are consistent with the City’s
Tree Regulations because the project will be required to provide compensatory tree plantings
at a rate consistent with Municipal Code requirements with a size and species of tree found
to be appropriate by the Tree Committee.
5. The design of the tentative map and proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious
health problems or substantial environmental damage since further development or
redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the City’s Development
Page 210 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 3
Standards, Engineering Standards, Mitigation Measures, and Conditions of Approval.
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 and Mitigation, Monitoring,
and Reporting Program, based on incorporation of the following mitigation measures, which will
reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant.
Air Quality
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles,
the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road
Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be
permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible;
and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and
enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with
13 CCR 2485. 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:
a. 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
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power
a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle
during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5 minutes
at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as
noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of
the 5-minute idling limit. The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation
can be reviewed at the following website: www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-
idling/2485.pdf.
Page 211 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 4
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing
activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate matter control measures
and detail each measure on the project grading and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent
airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’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 miles
per hour (mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever
possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or
other dust barriers as needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation
and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following
completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month
after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass
seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in
advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
shall maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between
top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code
(CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on
the exterior surfaces of motor vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that
may then fall onto any highway or street as described in CVC Section 23113
and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track out,
designate access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to
use them. Install and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles
enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-out prevention
device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at
preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and
a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate devices need periodic cleaning to be
effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-out soils, the track-out
prevention device may need to be modified.
Page 212 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 5
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto
adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where
feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and
building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose
responsibility is to ensure any fugitive dust emissions do not result in a nuisance
and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures as necessary to
minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s
limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their
duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in
progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be generated on an open dirt lot).
The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the
SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork,
or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall retain a registered geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property,
including sampling and testing for NOA in full compliance with SLOAPCD
requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the
City Community Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation
determines that the project would not have the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant
must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present
onsite, proposed earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in
full compliance with the various regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the
CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17
CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61,
Subpart M – Asbestos). These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing,
to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos
Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements
for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant
shall provide an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If
ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working days prior to any demolition work
the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work. The notification shall
Page 213 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 6
include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM
removal and disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project
grading / 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 SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria
morning glory on the project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant
Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria morning glory and shall be
overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season
prior to tract grading activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall
clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites shown on the project plans are ready.
Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area (as
designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the
mitigation site that will be maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing
earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be maintained as grassland habitat and no
planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as grazing activities)
will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the
areas currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat
created for 1,076 square-feet of habitat impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio
(habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum 1:1 replacement ratio is
achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and
stored for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As
needed, the mitigation site should be prepared for planting by removal of non-native
species or other measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil
has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-broadcasted into
suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be
incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion
Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and applied to other grassy
areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort. Depending on the season when
construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig
them up when soils are moist) and transplant them to containers to be maintained until
the mitigation sites are ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5
years to ensure no net loss of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant
Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and maintenance of the mitigation
site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
Page 214 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 7
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure
successful establishment of planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be
mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species onsite. The measurable objective
shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300 Cambria
morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess
the areal cover of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the
success criteria of having approximately 300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek
setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial actions such as
collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a
corresponding additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of
the rare plant mitigation effort could include non-native plant species removal within the
mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed application, or supplemental
irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort
and monitoring effort. The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the
City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each year) for the 5-year monitoring period
or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing
owl has been recorded in the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If
initial vegetation removal and site grading for the tract improvements is conducted
outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and no further
mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is
also required to avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see
Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading work must commence during the time
period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys for this
species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4
prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by
special-status wildlife species until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days
prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-disturbing activities, or demolition
of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey the project impact
area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering
populations, obscure bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A
separate survey shall be conducted for any phase of the project not conducted
concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure
demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate
survey techniques for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having
potential to occur onsite. For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or
wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and cover
objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat roost sites
shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these
species are found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate with the City, and CDFW as
appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful relocation of individuals to suitable
Page 215 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 8
habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating structures for displaced
woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or
occupied burrows can be avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted
from roost sites by placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for
night-time foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on
the results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in
coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status animal
species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may proceed with the
implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any
vegetation removal or tract improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker
Environmental Awareness Program that will be presented to all project personnel. This
program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological resources. It
shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project
site and their natural history, the status of the species and their protection under
environmental laws and regulations, and the penalties for take. Recommendations shall
be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be found on the project
site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to
protect wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits
to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the
project site for one or more overnight periods shall be either securely capped
before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before the materials are
moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt
fence, for wildlife that may have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches
deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any
wildlife species be detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary, to
meet air quality standards and protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans,
bottles, food scraps), small construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and
plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette butts) in animal-proof
containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet.
The program shall be repeated for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
Page 216 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 9
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to
delineate the allowable work area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the
stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract improvements, and during
subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction fence at
least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall
be erected along the creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access.
If possible, the fence shall be erected along the creek setback line, and encroachment into
the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground disturbance occur within
the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion
and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve
the purposes of safety/construction area delineation, wildlife exclusion, and siltation
prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for needed
maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property
is cleared and graded, and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor
the removal of structures, materials, and vegetation that may provide cover for obscure
bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting sites. The biologist shall
be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the
work area or CDFW shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering
season. Vegetation removal within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the
overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October through February) and obscure
bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species potentially
inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following
erosion and sedimentation control BMPs are required to be implemented during
vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot construction, and after the
construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by
scheduling construction to occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically
defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence to this measure would also
serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be
restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated staging
areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as described in Mitigation
Measure BIO-6.
Page 217 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 10
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot
construction, a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a
qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion control blankets,
straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be
employed to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical
approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil
disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater
protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and
erosion control measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior
to the initiation of site grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in
place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas,
riparian habitat and/or drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill
containment system installed. No vehicles or construction equipment shall be
stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground covers
are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily
basis to ensure proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills.
Construction staging areas shall be located in a location where spills would not
drain into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate
containment system. Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed
in any location where the tainted water could enter onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with
all local, state, and federal regulations. All uses of such compounds shall
observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other
state and federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project
site should be cleaned up immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other
stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing,
erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and/or other types
of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion and
sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used
as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project
engineer in consultation with a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above.
Methods may include recontouring graded areas to blend in with existing
natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the
table below. Native seed mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek
setback area through either direct hand seeding or hydroseeding methods.
Page 218 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 11
Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species
Application
Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus
carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia
microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a
compensatory mitigation program, and monitor the success of the program to
ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other waters on the subject
property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas delineated
as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant
shall provide documentation to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from
USACE, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and
a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory
agencies to not be required.
Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant shall
retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, City
of San Luis Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements, and If regulatory permits
are required, prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the
applicant shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean
Water Act and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to the creek. The
monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating
the limits of work in relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek
setback buffer, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning
glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer, the monitor shall
direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian habitat
during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of
the rip rap pad and any other work within the creek setback area on stormwater structures.
The monitor shall also oversee removal of non-native tree species and site preparation
for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP)
is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to
Page 219 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 12
the City and the biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of
the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting
riparian area: A Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be
recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation. The easement agreement shall
be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following activities
are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the
City Sustainability and Natural Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek
setback standards shall be applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code
requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and all
grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department and Natural
Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical
or archaeological remains are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated
with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City 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. These
requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all improvement/construction
plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during
ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order
shall be issued, and the City Community Development Director shall be notified.
California 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 PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of
Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s
final map and all improvement/construction plans.
Page 220 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 13
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and 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 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall
be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at
the project boundaries shall be shielded with the most modern noise control
devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for
project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever
possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-air exhaust from
pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise
abatement methods installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine
vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to
ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices (e.g.,
mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise
BMP, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development
Department prior to issuance of grading/building permits. The City shall provide and post
signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to commencement of
construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All
construction workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour
limitations and how, why, and where BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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. Tribal Cultural
Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan
Tribe shall be notified prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site
Page 221 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 14
monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface earthwork activities,
all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City
shall be notified immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures
CR-1 and CR-2.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the
applicant shall provide a vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered
professional forester or certified arborist for each lot. The plan shall identify fuel load
reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase defensible
space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also
identify appropriate standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements
for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the
following fire reduction methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report
(Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which
becomes a receptive fuel bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire
underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain gutters should be
protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences
and decks in the subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in
the back yards of the subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek,
riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in
height all around the northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin
at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-foot setback at the west
side of the creek and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback at the east
side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12.
Page 222 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 15
The purpose of this wall is to interrupt fire progression from the north onto the
proposed lots without obstructing the very desirable view of the open space.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on all
grading and construction plans. The City Community Development Department shall verify
compliance through initial and 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. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall label lots one through seven, sixteen, and
eighteen through twenty-three as “sensitive sites”. This status ensures that future site
development will respect existing site constraints, creek setback requirements, privacy of
occupants and neighbors of the project and be compatible with the scale and character of the
surrounding neighborhood. Prior to submittal of a building permit application, development
of these sensitive parcels shall require architectural review, in accordance with Municipal
Code Section 2.48.
2. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall state that lots one through seven are subject to
creek setback standards and requirements, consistent with Municipal Code Section 17.70.030.
3. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall increase the lot size of lot 19 to be no less than
6,900 square feet by reducing the size of lot 20, which shall be no less than 6,000 square feet,
consistent with Subdivision Regulations requirements for corner lots.
4. Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement required by
mitigation measure BIO-11. This easement shall include all the area between the creek top of
bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which are planned directly adjacent to the
creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline of the creek. The easement shall also cover
all areas identified for Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure
BIO-1.
5. Plans submitted for public improvements or grading of lots shall identify all trees proposed
for removal, their diameter at breast height, and the location of compensatory tree planting.
Compensatory tree planting shall be provided at a rate of one-to-one for all onsite trees
removed, or otherwise consistent with Municipal Code Standards, unless the tree being
removed is exempt from tree removal permitting by Municipal Code section 12.24.090 (C.1.).
Measurements of tree diameters shall be consistent with forestry best practices, to the
satisfaction of the City Arborist. Compensatory tree plantings shall be an equal mix of 15-
gallon and 24-inch box size and consist of at least 50% native tree species. All compensatory
Page 223 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 16
trees shall be irrigated and maintained by the property owner or subdivider until the tree is
established or the individual lot is sold.
6. Plans submitted for public improvements shall include a Construction Communication Plan.
This plan shall specify how and when existing residents adjacent to the project will be notified
about the schedule for grading and construction activities. Notification of the project schedule
should include all residences within a 300-foot radius of the project site and all residences on
Stanford Drive and Cuesta Drive.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development - Subdivision Conditions
7. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and monumentation
shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and
the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S. Customary Units in accordance with the
current City Engineering Standards. A separate application, checklist, and final map review
fee shall be paid at the time of final map processing.
8. The map and improvement plans shall be tied to the City’s vertical and horizontal control
network in accordance with the City Engineering Standards. Depending upon the location of
existing vertical control benchmark(s), a new benchmark may need to be established within
or adjoining the subdivision.
9. The final map submittal and improvement plans shall include a current title report. An
electronic copy of the title report with embedded links to referenced documents is preferred.
If not available, the submittal shall include a copy of each of the pertinent referenced
documents.
10. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new single family dwelling lot prior to map recordation.
The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of final map submittal. Credit
for the removal of the existing residence will be applied to the final fee.
11. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and maintenance of
the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map
recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket
easements.
12. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement
(P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot. This easement shall be clearly shown on the final map
submittal. Said easement shall be adjacent to and contiguous with all public right-of-way lines
bordering each lot.
13. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities,
access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, and maintenance of
the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map
Page 224 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 17
recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket
easements.
14. The final map shall include a public path easement connection from Westmont (east) if
attainable to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Public Works
Director. The easement definition of either a public pedestrian or bikeway easement shall be
confirmed with the City prior to map recordation and in concert with the subdivision
improvement plans.
15. A creek/biological open space easement shall be shown and noted on the map in accordance
with the mitigation measures. A creek maintenance Easement Agreement, in a format
approved by the City shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the map.
The agreement shall further clarify the creek maintenance responsibility and limits of
improvements allowed within the creek corridor. The agreement shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the City’s Sustainability and Natural Resources Official and Community
Development Director.
16. The relocation, extinguishment, or quitclaim of any existing easements shall be clearly
identified on the final map or shall be completed separately prior to map recordation if
applicable.
17. The final map shall show and label the limits of the calculated 100-year flood event. The
information may be included on an additional map sheet.
18. The project soils report shall be referenced on the final map in accordance with the subdivision
regulations. The soils engineer shall verify whether additional boring(s) or exploratory
trenching is required to cover the portions of the subdivision located under the existing
developed site. The final report shall complete the analysis and any final recommendation
regarding the potential for liquefaction.
19. The plans, map, and supporting documents shall show and note compliance with the City’s
Drainage Design Manual, Floodplain Management Regulations, and Post Construction
Stormwater Regulations.
20. Stormwater Control Measures (SCM’s) and piping within the public right-of-way should be
limited to the minimum extent feasible. All SCM’s shall be the maintenance responsibility
of the HOA or private property owners. SCM’s that are located within the public right-of-
way will require the recordation of an Encroachment Agreement in a format provided by the
City. The agreement shall be recorded in conjunction the map recordation.
21. The stormwater strategy and subdivision improvement plans shall consider the requirement
for permanent irrigation to any bio-remediation SCM’s. The irrigation system could be
provided from the adjoining domestic meter located along the lot frontage. A common
landscape meter could be provided at the commercial meter water impact fee rate. Private
service piping located within the public right-of-way will require the recordation of an
Page 225 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 18
encroachment agreement. Cross-connection control may be required for all future domestic
meters for lots that are crossed with a private common irrigation service.
22. An Operation and Maintenance Manual and recorded Private Stormwater Conveyance
Agreement will be required as part of the Stormwater Control Plan approval and map
recordation.
23. The final map submittal shall include CCR’s to define the maintenance responsibility of the
several private and/or shared facilities.
24. All existing structures, private water supply, or private waste disposal system shall be
demolished or abandoned to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, Building Official,
and County Health Department with proper permits prior to map recordation. Existing
structures or improvements may remain if specifically approved, are not considered to be a
nuisance or health hazard, and are shown to not be affected by the proposed location of
property lines and/or improvements.
25. The subdivision improvement plan submittal shall include the standard application, checklist,
engineer’s estimate of probable cost, a plan review fee/retainer, and all supporting documents.
26. All new on-site and off-site subdivision improvements shall comply with the City Engineering
Standards and Standard Specifications in effect at the time of subdivision plan approval.
27. The street paving shall comply with City Engineering Standards. If construction phasing of
the new street pavement is proposed, the phasing shall provide for the ultimate structural street
section and pavement life per standard #7110. The engineer of record shall detail this
requirement in the public improvement plans, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
28. The improvement plans shall clearly show and label the existing rights-of-way, street
improvements, and utility infrastructure located at the subdivision boundaries and points of
connection to Westmont (east), Cuesta, Stanford, and Westmont (west).
29. The transitions from the several sidewalk connections from the adjoining neighborhood 4’
wide sidewalks to the new 5’ detached sidewalks and 6’ walking path shall be approved by
the City Engineer prior to map recordation. Limited off-site sidewalk improvements may be
required for the transitions and for the connection to ADA compliant and competent material.
30. Sidewalk extensions and or terminations at the Westmont connections to the subdivision shall
be approved by the Public Works Department prior to final map recordation. Unless
otherwise approved for deferral or waiver by the Public Works Department, the through
connection from Westmont (east) will require a continuation of the sidewalk along the street
end to provide an accessible connection to the 6’ walking path.
Page 226 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 19
31. Westmont street termination improvements, storm drain capture, and utility connections may
require the removal of the existing parkway street tree. A compensatory parkway tree may
be required prior to final map recordation.
32. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the proposed pathway connection from
Westmont (east) to Cuesta in compliance with City and ADA standards unless otherwise
approved by the Public Works Director. Ramps and landings may be required if the slope
can’t be reduced to walkway gradients. Handrails, if required may need to include a non-
skateboard feature or may need to be attached to a guardrail, fence, or other barrier to
discourage the establishment of a skateable feature.
33. The improvement plans shall show the location of a Mail Box Unit (MBU’s) per City
Engineering Standards and the approval of the Post Master. Unless otherwise approved by
the City, the MBU(s) shall be located outside of the public right-of-way. A separate easement
may need to be included on the map.
34. The subdivision plans shall show water, sewer, gas, electrical, phone, and cable connections
to each lot. Any proposal for the elimination of a gas main and/or gas services shall be
approved by the City and supplying utility company.
35. Plans submitted for public improvements shall show the final line and grade of all sewer,
water, and storm drain lines to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Utility Departments.
Utility separations shall be provided for all new and existing systems unless a design
exception is approved by the City and State, if applicable.
36. The utility plan shall include water services and meters to each lot. The service may be
provided as individual services or could be provided as a “U-branch” at the common property
line per City Engineering Standard #6260 and to the satisfaction of the Utilities Department.
37. Unless specifically approved by the Building Official, and the directors of Community
Development, Public Works, and Utilities, the sewer service to Lots 1, 2, and 3 shall be gravity
sewers. The developer shall exhaust reasonable efforts to provide a gravity sewer to each of
the lots to either Westmont, Stanford, or through an easement to Jeffrey. If sewer ejectors are
required for one or more lots, a Notice of Requirements shall include this item and shall be
recorded in conjunction with the final map.
38. Fire Hydrants shall be provided per City Engineering Standards. The final placement shall
consider the hydrant availability and distance from the tract boundary at all four tract
interfaces with the adjoining public streets. Off-site hydrants may be required. Final hydrant
locations and spacing shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and Utilities
Department prior to final map recordation.
39. A preliminary electrical service design/memo from PGE shall be provided prior to approval
of the subdivision improvement plans. The final PGE design/handout package may be listed
as a deferred submittal item on the cover sheet of the improvement plans. Service to the
Page 227 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 20
subdivision shall be completed without a net increase in the number of service poles located
within the public right of way.
40. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall install street lighting and all
associated facilities including but not limited to conduits, sidewalk vaults, fusing, wiring, and
luminaires per City Engineering Standards. Off-site street lighting improvements, alterations,
or upgrades may be required along roadways leading to and from the proposed development
to complete the necessary public improvements.
41. Improvement plans shall include a complete tree summary show the diameter and species of
all trees. The plan shall clarify the trees to remain and the trees to be removed. Trees to
remain may require a tree preservation plan per City Engineering Standards.
42. Prior to recordation of the final map, invasive plant species shall be removed or eradicated
along and within the Twin Ridge Creek corridor to the satisfaction of the Planning Division
and Sustainability and Natural Resources Official .
43. Agency permits required for any work within the creek corridor shall be secured prior to
commencing with any demolitions, grading, and construction within the jurisdictional areas.
Any jurisdictional permits from the Army Corp, Fish and Wildlife, or Regional Water Quality
Control Board required for the drainage, site improvements, street and road improvements
shall be issued prior to plan approval and/or commencing with work within the respective
waterways. Permit conditions shall be reflected on the approved subdivision plans.
44. A SWPPP and Waste Discharger Identification Number (WDID) shall be issued and
referenced on the grading, erosion control, and stormwater control plan sheets prior to plan
approval and encroachment permit issuance.
45. The grading and drainage plan and reports shall clarify the limit of run-on from the adjoining
public streets and from any upslope private watershed. The upslope watershed to the north
(Cal Fire) shall be evaluated for the capacity of the current drainage systems. The systems
shall be shown to be adequate to carry the design storm, shall be upgraded, or subdivision
improvements added to collect and convey any run-on.
46. Prior to final map recordation, all proposed retaining walls shall be evaluated for collecting
and conveying any surface run-on that might be tributary to the back of wall. Any
concentrated drainage shall be conveyed and discharged in a non-erosive manner.
47. The proposed pad grades shall provide a minimum surface drainage design gradient from a
defined high point(s) to an approved drainage outlet. The pad grading and drainage plan and
build-out strategy shall not rely on subsurface drainage systems without a safe overflow.
48. The proposed slope banks shall honor the top and toe of slope setbacks from the adjoining
property lines in accordance with the California Building Code unless captured with a
Page 228 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 21
retaining wall or curb. Pad grading and drainage improvements plans should consider the
final grading and drainage proposed for the typical lot development.
49. Street trees are required as a condition of development. The proposed trees may be planted
in conjunction with the subdivision improvements or could be deferred to individual lot
development. The proposed parkway planting or bio-remediation improvements shall
consider and honor the requirement for parkway tree planting at the rate of approximately one
tree per every 35 lineal feet of frontage.
Utilities Department
50. The proposed utility infrastructure shall comply with the latest engineering design standards
effective at the time the permit for public improvement is obtained and shall have reasonable
alignments needed for maintenance of public infrastructure along public roads.
51. Any private sewer lateral improvement included with public improvement plans that crosses
one proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide evidence that a private utility
easement appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior to issuance of a permit for
such improvement.
52. Public improvement plans submitted shall show all utility easements dedicated to the City in
compliance with the latest engineering design standards and shall have reasonable alignments
needed for maintenance of public infrastructure.
53. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the existing terminal manhole in Cuesta
Drive to be abandoned and a new cleanout manhole shall be installed upstream of the sewer
lateral connection for Lot 16. The proposed sewer lateral for Lot 16 shall connect to the new
6” sewer main extension downstream of the cleanout manhole with a wye.
54. Public improvement plans submitted shall show the proposed public sewer main extension
and manhole in Westmont Avenue to be 6” PVC pipe and meet current City Engineering
Standards.
55. Public improvement plans submitted shall show water meters and private sewer laterals with
appropriate clearance from one another per City Standards.
56. Public improvement plans submitted shall show a separate water meter provided for each new
parcel per Chapter 13.04.120 of the City’s Municipal Code.
57. Potable city water shall not be used for major construction activities, such as grading and dust
control, as required under Prohibited Water Uses; Chapter 13.07.070.C of the City’s
Municipal Code. Recycled water is available through the City’s Construction Water Permit
program.
Page 229 of 359
Resolution No. PC-1042-21
468 and 500 Westmont Avenue, SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
Page 22
58. The proposed 8” public water main within Stanford Drive shall meet the current City
Standards at the time of building permit submittal and shall maintain a minimum 12”
clearance above the proposed public sewer main, per City Standards.
Indemnification
59. 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 Hopkins, seconded by Commissioner Shoresman, and on the final
roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hopkins and Shoresman, Vice-Chair Quincey, Chair Jorgensen
NOES: Commissioner Dandekar
REFRAIN: Commissioner Kahn
ABSENT: Commissioner Wulkan
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 28th day of July, 2021.
_____________________________
Tyler Corey, Secretary
Planning Commission
Page 230 of 359
Page 231 of 359
6
66666
Page 232 of 359
Page 233 of 359
6
6
Page 234 of 359
Page 235 of 359
Page 236 of 359
Page 237 of 359
Page 238 of 359
Page 239 of 359
Page 240 of 359
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
For ER # EID-0170-2020
Minor modifications have been made to this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) in response to
public comments about the proposed project. These modifications do not require recirculation of this IS/MND
because the edits regarding biological resources and hydrology constitute minor modifications and clarifications to
an adequate MND, provide evidence substantiating the conclusions of the IS/MND, and do not include significant
new information that would result in a new significant environmental impact or a substantial increase in the
severity of a significant environmental impact. All new text is indicated by: underlined, bold, and italicized text.
Deleted text is indicated by: strike-through.
1. Project Title:
468-500 Westmont Drive Tentative Tract Map
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Kyle Van Leeuwen, Assistant Planner
(805) 781-7091
4. Project Location:
468 and 500 Westmont Drive (APN 052-496-001), San Luis Obispo, CA (project site)
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Andrew Gareth Meinhold and Timothy James Meinhold
1950 Bridle Ridge Trail
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
6. General Plan Designations:
Low Density Residential
7. Zoning:
R-1 (Low Density Residential)
8. Description of the Project:
The 468-500 Westmont Drive Tentative Tract Map Project (project) is a request to the City of San Luis Obispo
(City) for a Tentative Tract Map (TR 3157) for the subdivision of one existing parcel (Assessor’s Parcel Number
[APN] 052-496-001) totaling 4.98 acres into 23 individual parcels meant to facilitate residential development on
land in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) zone. The new parcels would range in size from 6,000 to 22,78324,451
square feet (sf) and would be located at 468 and 500 Westmont Drive, at the northern edge of the city limits (Figure
1). Access improvements would include a proposed 54- to 60-foot-wide access road beginning at the existing
Page 241 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
terminus of Stanford Drive and looping east to connect with the existing terminus of Cuesta Drive. The variation
in the road width accounts for existing widths of Cuesta and Stanford Drives. This access road would provide
access to Lots 4–16 and 19–23. Lots 1–3 would take access from a shared driveway off the western terminus of
Westmont Avenue and Lots 17 and18 would be accessed from the eastern terminus of Westmont Avenue. Parking
for the tract would be provided onsite, and each residential lot is designed to accommodate the required two parking
spaces for each lot. The development proposes a connection to the existing waterline on Stanford Drive and looping
it around to Cuesta Drive. An additional water line from Westmont Avenue would connect to Cuesta Drive through
an easement across Lot 15. A 17-foot-wide, asphalt-concrete (AC) easement across Lot 15 from Westmont Avenue
to Cuesta Drive is proposed for drainage, utility, and bicycle/pedestrians. A drainage basin is also proposed within
the easement. A design exception for the easement (bicycle pathway) is requested as the current slope is 9 percent,
which exceeds the standard of 8 percent. A proposed 15-foot-wide sewer line easement is proposed along the
western property line of Lot 10. There is an existing sewer line that extends across Lot 10 that would be relocated
within the proposed easement. A fire lane easement is proposed across Lots 1–3 that would be used for emergency
vehicle access and would contain a sewer line that serves Lots 1-3. A 10-foot-wide public utility easement is
proposed along the frontages of Lots 4–16 and 19–23. A 10-foot-wide Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
easement is proposed along the rear yards of Lots 3 and 7–18 and an additional PG&E easement is proposed along
the western edge of Lots 1–3. Drainage easements are proposed along Lots 4, 15, and 19–23 and would be designed
to comply with the City’s Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. Proposed drainage measures include an
85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment. Four-foot
retaining walls located in the rear or side yards would be provided for slope stability on Lots 1-5 and 8-23.
Additional 3-foot retaining walls would be provided on Lots 8 and 9 for wildland protection. (See Attachment 2.)
The project includes a phasing plan that would allow for the final map recordation into three phases, as allowed
under Section 66456.1 of the Government Code. Phase one would include Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3, Lot 17, and Lot 18.
Phase two would include Lots 4 through 10 and Lots 21 through 23. Phase three would include Lot 11 through 16,
Lot 19, and Lot 20.
Table 1 summarizes existing and proposed characteristics for the proposed lots.
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Parcel Characteristics
Parcel Size (total) Slope Site Conditions and Improvements
Existing
Parcel
4.98 acres 8% • Two residential units with a shared carport
• Accessed by a private driveway from Stanford
Drive
• Ornamental/ruderal vegetation associated with
the developed area
• Onsite creek with associated wetland and riparian
areas in the western portion of the property
• Annual grassland with Cambria morning glory
(Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis)
(300 plants)
Proposed Lots
1–3
1.044 acres
(45,484 sf)
8% • Three proposed lots located on the western
portion of the property
• Accessed by a proposed common driveway from
Westmont Avenue from the east
• Proposed 20-foot setback from the riparian edge
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
Page 242 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
• Two proposed stormwater chambers with 95th
percentile retention area (assume 1 foot of
ponding)
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lot 3
• Proposed fire lane easement across Lots 1–3
• Existing onsite creek with associated riparian and
wetland vegetation
• Existing rock outcropping between Lots 1 and 2
• Existing trees, annual grassland, and occurrences
of Cambria morning glory
Proposed Lots
4–7
0.619 acres
(26,984 sf)
8% • Four proposed lots located on the central western
portion of the property
• Accessed by a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed 20-foot setback from the riparian edge
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards of Lots 4 and 5
• Proposed Biofiltration treatment within proposed
road
• Existing onsite creek with associated riparian and
wetland areas
• Existing occurrences of Cambria morning glory
and annual grassland
Proposed Lots
8–14
0.836 acres
(36,434 sf)
8% • Seven proposed lots located in the central
northern portion of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed Filterra system within the proposed
road
• Proposed 15-foot-wide sewer easement on Lot 10
for sewer lines and emergency access
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lots 7–14
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards with an additional 3-foot wall for Lots 8 and
9
• Existing residential units with common carport
and ruderal vegetation
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
15–16
0.275 acres
(12,000 sf)
9% • Two proposed lots located in the eastern portion
of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
Page 243 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
• Proposed 17-foot-wide utility, drainage, and
bicycle/pedestrian easement across Lot 15
• Proposed 85th percentile retention area within the
proposed easement
• Proposed Filterra system adjacent to Lot 16
within the proposed road
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of lots
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
17–18
0.288 acres
(12,534 sf)
8-9% • Two proposed lots located in the eastern portion
of the property
• Accessed from Westmont Avenue from the west
• Proposed connection to the existing water main in
Westmont Avenue
• Proposed 10-foot-wide PG&E easement along the
rear portion of Lots 7–14
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Proposed Lots
19–23
0.789 acres
(34,389 sf)
8% • Five proposed lots located in the central southern
portion of the property
• Accessed from a proposed 54- to 60-foot interior
road from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
• Proposed 85th percentile retention area at the rear
end of the lots
• Proposed Filterra system adjacent to Lot 23 and a
separate system located adjacent to Lot 19 within
the proposed road
• Proposed 4-foot retaining wall in rear or side
yards
• Existing annual grassland and trees
Note: Refer to Figure 3 for proposed lot locations.
The project site is generally surrounded by one- and two-story residential units to the south, east and west. There
is undeveloped residential land to the north of the project site and California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE) Station #12 located directly northeast.
There is a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with an associated riparian habitat that extends through the western
portion of the project area that would be located at the rear (eastern) end of Lots 1–3 and the rear (western) end of
Lots 4–8. The freshwater forested/shrub wetland connects to a freshwater emergent wetland located on
undeveloped land to the north of the project site. The site is generally comprised of developed/ruderal land, riparian
habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native trees throughout the project site, a rock
outcropping between Lots 1 and 2, and presence of Cambria morning glory (Calystegia subacaulis ssp. episcopalis;
a rare plant species) on Lots 3–6.
Page 244 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project would demolish two existing residential structures and several accessory structures to accommodate
the tract improvements.
To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 ornamental and native trees would be removed. Acacia trees located
in riparian areas would be removed; however, the project proposes to replace Acacia trees with native vegetation,
including toyon (Heteromelis arbutifolia) or oaks. Proposed improvements would result in 4.27 acres of
groundwork, which includes 7,900 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 4,760 cy of fill.
No residential development on the new parcels is proposed at this time, but it is anticipated that each new parcel
will be developed as a single-family residential use, for a total of 23 single-family residential units. Each single-
family residential property has the potential to include an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a junior accessory
dwelling unit (JADU), as an accessory use to the single-family residential use.
9. Project Entitlements:
Development Review
Tree Removal Permit
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:
Surrounding uses and stories of surrounding buildings are summarized below:
• North: undeveloped residential land and CAL FIRE Station #12
• East: one- and two-story single-family residences; apartments beyond
• South: one- and two-story single-family residences
• West: one- and two-story single-family residences
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.?
Native American tribes were notified about the project consistent with City and State of California (State)
regulations including, but not limited to, Assembly Bill (AB) 52. A representative from the Salinan tribe requested
a cultural resource specialist from their tribe be onsite to monitor all ground disturbing activities, and this measure
has been included as a mitigation requirement (see Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources).
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Regional Water Quality Control Board
U.S Army Corp of Engineers
Page 245 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Page 246 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 2. Project Site Map
Page 247 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 8 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Figure 3. Site Plan Map
Page 248 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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.
Note: This revised Initial Study does not identify any new significant impacts and this table has been amended to correctly
reflect the determinations identified in the initial analysis.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☒ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ Recreation
☒ Air Quality Hydrology and Water Quality ☐ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☒ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Utilities and Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☒ Wildfire
Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing ☒ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
FISH AND WILDLIFE FEES
☐
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has reviewed the CEQA document and written no effect
determination request and has determined that the project will not have a potential effect on fish, wildlife, or
habitat (see attached determination).
☒
The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and
Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been
circulated to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for review and comment.
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
☒
This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State
agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Housing and Community
Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)).
Page 249 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required. ☐
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant” impact(s) or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed
☐
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant
to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
☐
Signature Date
For: Michael Codron,
Printed Name Community Development Director
Page 250 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 11 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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
Page 251 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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, 4 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic
buildings within a local or state scenic highway?
1, 4, 5,
6 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1, 7 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo 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. The COSE and City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element assign scenic value ratings of “moderate”
and “high” to several roadways in the city, based on the availability of views of scenic resources from these public viewpoints.
According to the Circulation Element, the segment of U.S. Route 101 (US 101) through the city of San Luis Obispo is identified
as having moderate and high scenic value. The COSE also identifies Santa Rosa Street, as having moderate to high scenic value;
however, neither Westmont Avenue, Stanford Drive, or Cuesta Drive have any scenic designation. The COSE does not identify
any “cones of view” or other important scenic vistas in the project site vicinity.
The project is located on land that is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) near the northern city limit. The surrounding land
uses include one- and two-story residences to the south, east, and west, undeveloped land to the north, and CAL FIRE Station
#12 to the northeast. Bishop Peak is prominent to the northwest. The existing parcel supports two existing residential units and
a common carport that is accessed by a private Driveway off Stanford Drive. Ruderal vegetation is present onsite surrounding
the existing development. The project site includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian habitat in the
western portion of the project site. The project site also includes a rock outcropping and presence of Cambria morning glory, a
rare plant species, in the western portion of the project site. The remainder of the site is primarily comprised of annual grassland
and ornamental and native trees.
While no specific development proposal has been identified for the site, based on the underlying zoning and proposed parcel
sizes, this analysis assumes that future development would consist of residential development. Such development would be
subject to development standards identified in Chapter 17.16 Low-Density Residential (R-1) Development Standards and the
City’s Community Design Guidelines, which are intended to provide for infill projects of high architectural quality that are
compatible with existing development.
A scenic vista is generally defined as a high-quality view displaying good aesthetic and compositional values that can
be seen from public viewpoints. 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. Some scenic vistas are
officially or informally designated by public agencies or other organizations. Based on the COSE map of scenic
roadways and vistas, the project site is not directly located along roadways considered to be of moderate or high scenic
value or within the cone of view of a scenic roadway. Santa Rosa Street is the nearest road of scenic value, located
Page 252 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
approximately 415 feet east of the project site. Existing development including an apartment complex located at the
corner of Westmont Avenue and Santa Rosa Street as well as other residential units would block views of the project
from Santa Rosa Street. Residential development is not currently proposed; however, future development would be
consistent with existing residential units and would comply with City design and zoning standards; therefore, the project
would not affect adversely affect a scenic vista and potential impacts would be less than significant.
The section of US 101 that extends through the city of San Luis Obispo is classified as an eligible State Scenic Highway
but is not officially designated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Santa Rosa Street eventually
turns into State Route (SR) 1 north of the project site, which extends along California’s coast. The portion of SR 1 north
of the project site is an officially designated Scenic Highway by Caltrans. However, the project site is not visible from
either US 101 or SR 1; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The State and City have designated highways that offer scenic views as Scenic Highways. The City has identified
US 101 from the southern city limit to Marsh Street as a highway with high scenic value, and between Marsh and Broad
Streets and north of California Street as a highway with moderate scenic value. Santa Rosa Street north of Foothill
Boulevard and past the northern city limit is designated as having moderate to high scenic value.
The project site is accessed from Santa Rosa Street to Westmont Avenue from the east, Stanford Drive from the
southwest, and Westmont Avenue from the west. The Patricia Drive Entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located
0.5 mile northwest of the proposed project site. Views of the proposed housing tract from Bishop Peak and associated
trails would be consistent with current existing views of developed residential units.
Currently, there is no specific development planned for the parcels. It can be assumed that each parcel will be developed
as a single-family residential use, with an ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses in accordance with State law.
Construction of future residences, ADUs, and JADUs may result in additional tree removal, potential earthwork, and
impervious surface area; however, the specifics of which are not known at this time. The project currently proposes a
subdivision of a single parcel (APN 052-496-001) into 23 lots; grading of the project site; development of a road to
connect Stanford and Cuesta Drives; installment of necessary utility, drainage, and bicycle/pedestrian easement; and
necessary tree removal. Future residential development on these parcels would need to comply with City ordinances for
R-1 (Low Density Residential) development outlined in Sections 17.16 and 17.70 of the City Municipal Code and with
the COSE, which outlines view guidelines regarding urban development (Policy 9.1.2). The COSE states that urban
development should reflect its architectural context. This does not necessarily prescribe a specific style, but requires
deliberate design choices that acknowledge human scale, natural site features, and neighboring urban development, and
that are compatible with historical and architectural resources.
As mentioned above, improvements would require the removal of trees and a potential removal of a rock outcropping
located on the western portion of the project site. The COSE states that scenic and unique landforms, including
significant trees or outcroppings, should be preserved. Proposed tree removal would be consistent with the City’s Tree
Ordinance, which establishes requirements for compensatory planting (1:1) and preservation requirements for retaining
trees with historic or unusual value. The rock outcropping is located between proposed Lots 1 and 2 and depending on
final construction plans would likely be removed. The outcropping is neither scenic or unique (such as those of the
Morros) and any impacts or removal of it as a result of the project would be insignificant and not in conflict with policies
of the COSE. Additionally, none of the trees onsite have historic or unusual value.
Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with applicable zoning and the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, and
impacts would be considered less than significant.
The project is not currently proposing the development of outdoor lighting sources that could create a new source of
light or glare. Future development plans have not been specified; however, if new light sources are proposed, they must
adhere to the COSE (Policy 9.2.3), which states outdoor lighting shall avoid operating at unnecessary locations, levels,
and times; spillage into areas not needing or wanting illumination; glare; and frequencies that interfere with astronomical
viewing. Outdoor lighting standards include, but are not limited to, a requirement for outdoor light sources to be shielded
and directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, minimum levels of lighting consistent with public
safety standards, and limits to hours of lighting operation. Future residential development would be required to comply
with the Lighting and Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Section 17.70.100). The project would also be subject to
Page 253 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
review and approval by the City Community Development Director to ensure compliance with these standards prior to
final approval. Therefore, impacts from new sources of light or glare would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site is not located within a scenic vista or within the viewshed of a designated State Scenic Highway and is consistent
with existing views visible from Santa Rosa Street. The project does not propose any design features that are inconsistent with
the current zoning regulations or other applicable regulations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
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
Significan
t 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?
2, 9 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? 2, 10 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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, 3, 8 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use? 1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 9,
10 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The California Department of Conservation (CDOC) 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
Page 254 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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.
No portion of the project site or immediately surrounding areas support active agricultural uses. The project site is not loc ated
within or immediately adjacent to land zoned for agricultural uses. Based on Figure 6 in the COSE, the project site is not located
within or immediately adjacent to land under an active Williamson Act contract.
According to 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.
According to FMMP designations, the project site is located on Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2020). Since the project
site is not located on land designated as Farmland by the FMMP, the project would not result in the conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use; therefore, no impacts would occur.
The closest Prime Farmland is located approximately 530 feet east of the project just beyond Santa Rosa Street;
however, this area is not zoned for agricultural uses under the City’s COSE. The proposed project would not disturb the
FMMP designated Prime Farmland or interfere with agricultural zoning designations. The project site and adjacent land
are not under a Williamson Act contract. The closest land under a Williamson Act contract is located approximately
0.87 mile west on the opposite side of Bishop Peak. Proposed improvements would not affect nearby land under a
Williamson Act contract or conflict with nearby land that is zoned for agricultural uses; therefore, the project would not
conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract, and no impacts would occur.
The project site is currently zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is surrounded by R-1 (Low Density Residential)
zoning designations to the north, west, and south and open space to the east. Therefore, the project site does not include
land use designations or zoning for forest land or timberland. The project would not conflict with zoning for forest land,
timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, and no impacts would occur.
The project site contains more than 10% of native tree cover resulting from coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) located
primarily along the northern and eastern property lines. While these trees provide an aesthetic benefit to the project site,
they are not present in such a quantity to provide for significant management of forest resources. Subdivision
improvements would require the removal of native trees, and pursuant to the City’s Tree Regulations (City Municipal
Code Chapter 12.24), the project would be required to compensate for removed trees at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Therefore,
the project’s impact related to loss or conversion of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production
would be less than significant.
The project site is surrounded low-density residential uses to the north, west, and south and open space to the east. The
nearest agricultural uses are approximately 530 feet east of the project site. The proposed project would be consistent
with surrounding uses and consistent with existing zoning for this site and would not adversely affect agricultural water
supplies or other agricultural support facilities. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial changes in the
environment that could result in conversion of nearby agricultural land or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest
use, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site is located in an urbanized area and is not within or adjacent to Farmland, land zoned for agricultural or fo rest
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.
Page 255 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
11, 12,
13 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
11, 12,
13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
1, 3,
12, 13 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people? 1, 14 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo 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 San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District
(SLOAPCD). The SLOAPCD monitors air pollutant levels to assure that air quality standards are met, and if they are not met,
develops strategies to meet the standards. Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCCAB is classified as
being in “attainment” or as “nonattainment.”
San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as “nonattainment” for the State standards for ozone, partial nonattainment (in
eastern San Luis Obispo County, outside of the project area) for federal ambient standards for ground-level ozone (O3), and
nonattainment for the State standards for particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10). The COSE identifies goals
and policies to achieve and maintain air quality that supports health and enjoyment for those who live, work, and visit the c ity.
These goals and policies include meeting federal and State air quality standards, reducing dependency on gasoline- or diesel-
powered motor vehicles, and encouraging walking, biking, and public transit use.
The major sources of PM10 in the SCCAB are agricultural operations, vehicle dust, grading, and dust produced by high winds.
Additional sources of particulate pollution include diesel exhaust, mineral extraction and production, combustion products from
industry and motor vehicles, smoke from open burning, paved and unpaved roads, condensation of gaseous pollutants into liquid
or solid particles, and wind-blown dust from soils disturbed by demolition and construction, agricultural operations, off-road
vehicle recreation, and other activities. Ozone is a secondary pollutant that is formed by a reaction between nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROGs) in the presence of sunlight. Therefore, ozone levels are dependent on the amount of
these precursors. In the SCCAB, the major sources of ROGs are motor vehicles, organic solvents, petroleum production, and
pesticides. The major sources of NOx are motor vehicles, public utility power generation, and fuel combustion by various
industrial sources.
The SLOAPCD has developed a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated
with a November 2017 Clarification Memorandum) to evaluate project-specific impacts and determine if potentially significant
impacts could result from a project. To evaluate long-term emissions, cumulative effects, and establish countywide programs to
reach acceptable air quality levels, the 2001 San Luis Obispo County Clean Air Plan (CAP) was adopted by the SLOAPCD.
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to changes in air quality than others, depending on the population groups and the
activities involved. The CARB has identified the following groups that 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 nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family residences located adjacent to the
south (10 feet), west (20 feet), and east (10 feet) of the project site.
Page 256 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) has been identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Any ground disturbance or
demolition of existing structures 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. The
SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for NOA to occur.
In order to be considered consistent with the 2001 San Luis Obispo County CAP, a project must be consistent with the
land use planning and transportation control measures (TCMs) and strategies outlined in the CAP. The proposed project
is consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP. The proposed development’s
location, uses, and intensity are generally consistent with planning envisioned in the 2014 City of San Luis Obispo
General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) update and with the CAP’s land use planning strategies. The
project is located within the City’s urban reserve line and would not designate more land for urban use, would be in
close proximity to public transportation, and supports compact communities’ strategies. Increases in housing units
would help to offset projected imbalances between jobs and housing units, as noted in the 2019 Regional Housing Needs
Allocation Plan (RHNA) prepared by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). Improvements in a
jobs-to-housing imbalance would help support and promote local and regional improvements related to increased
transportation mobility and potential reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The proposed project does not include
commercial or industrial land uses that would result in increases in employment.
The proposed project would be consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP.
Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Construction of the subdivision improvements would disturb approximately 4.27 acres of land and result in emissions
of ROGs, NOx, and fugitive dust emissions (PM10). The parcel subdivision would facilitate future single-family
residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses, that would result in emissions of pollutants during
construction activity. During operation, the project would result in emissions of ozone precursor pollutants associated
with mobile source emissions and other uses.
Construction Emissions
Proposed subdivision improvements would disturb approximately 4.27 acres of land and require approximately
12,600 cy of total earthwork; however, specific future development plans are currently unknown and have the potential
to result in additional ground disturbance causing the production of more pollutants. Construction of subdivision
improvements and future residential structures have the potential to cause a short-term increase in dust and vehicle
emissions, including diesel particulate matter (DPM), ROGs, NOx, and particulate matter. As shown in Table 2,
construction emissions from proposed subdivision improvements would exceed the SLOAPCD’s applicable screening
thresholds for ROG, NOx, DPM, or PM10. Therefore, potential construction-related emissions of these pollutants would
require SLOAPCD Tier 1 mitigation as described in Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2.
Table 2. Project Construction Emissions
Criteria Pollutant Total Project
Emissions
SLOAPCD
Screening
Threshold
Exceeds
Threshold?
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) + Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 0.72 tons 2.5 tons/quarter No
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 0.03 tons 0.13 tons/quarter Yes
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10) 3.20 tons 2.5 tons/quarter Yes
It is anticipated that the subdivision improvements and construction of single-family residential uses, with an ADUs
and JADUs as potential accessory uses, would occur sequentially. Exact grading volumes for the residential
development are unknown at this time but would likely involve less than 4 acres of site disturbance and 1,200 cy of
earthwork per day, which would not result in exceedances of the SLOAPCD thresholds. To minimize potential impacts,
AQ-1 and AQ-2 would be applicable to the residential development. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation.
Page 257 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Operational Emissions
The SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook provides operational screening criteria to identify projects with the
potential to exceed SLOAPCD operational significance thresholds (see Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook).
Based on Table 1-1 of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the project does not propose development that would have the
potential to result in operational emissions that would exceed SLOAPCD thresholds (76 single-family residences).
Based on the relatively low volume of trips associated with the project and the type of activities proposed, operational
impacts associated with the project would be minimal. The project would not generate substantial new long-term traffic
trips or vehicle emissions and does not propose construction of substantial new direct (source) emissions. Therefore,
potential operational emissions would be less than significant.
The project site is located within 1,000 feet of multiple sensitive receptors, including single-family residential units to
the south, east, and west of the project site. The development of single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs
as potential accessory uses, would result in temporary construction vehicle emissions and fugitive dust that may affect
surrounding sensitive receptors. The SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook recognizes special conditions, such as
proximity to sensitive receptors, that require implementation of standard construction mitigation measures to reduce
diesel idling (DPM) and fugitive dust. Due to the project’s proximity to surrounding residential areas (less than 1,000
feet), standard measures for reducing DPM and fugitive dust are required. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 would
reduce exposure of sensitive receptors to adverse fugitive dust and construction vehicle emissions; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Project development activities, such as building construction, utility trenching, and installation, would generate odors
associated with equipment exhaust and fumes. The proposed activities would not differ significantly from those
resulting from any other type of construction project. Any effects would be short term in nature limited to the
construction phase of the proposed project and would be less than significant.
The SLOAPCD NOA Map indicates that the project site is located within an area identified as having a potential for
NOA to occur. The project includes excavation for road construction and trenching and installation of new water,
wastewater, and stormwater service pipelines to the proposed new parcels. The project may also include demolition of
an existing barn and shed, which have the potential to disturb asbestos-containing materials (ACM). Demolition can
have potential negative air quality impacts, including issues surrounding proper handling, demolition, and disposal of
ACM. Future development of the parcels would also likely include excavation for foundations and trenching for utilities.
Pursuant to SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining
Operations (17 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 93105), the applicant is required to conduct a geologic
evaluation prior to any ground-disturbing activities and comply with existing regulations regarding NOA, if present.
Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 have been identified to require the applicant to complete a geologic evaluation
and follow all applicable protocols and procedures if NOA is determined to be present onsite. Mitigation Measure AQ-
5 requires inspection for ACM prior to demolition and reported to the SLOAPCD. Based on compliance with identified
mitigation and existing regulations, this potential impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the applicant shall
implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with 13 CCR 2485. 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:
Page 258 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
a. 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
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner,
or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater
than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area, except as noted in
Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall implement the following particulate matter control measures and detail each measure on the project grading
and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the
site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’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 miles per hour
(mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as
needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall
be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall
be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders,
jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least 2 feet
of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of motor
vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as described in
CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track out, designate
access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install and operate a
“track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved streets. The track-
out prevention device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective at preventing track
out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble strips or steel plate
devices need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-out soils, the track-
out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any fugitive
dust emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation measures
Page 259 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s limit of
20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and
weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could be generated
on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the SLOAPCD
Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition (Contact Tim Fuhs at
805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a registered
geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full
compliance with SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community
Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have
the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present onsite, proposed
earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various regulatory
jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface
Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos). These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant shall provide an asbestos
report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10 working
days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work. The
notification shall include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM removal and
disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Regulation
(NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, 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, 4, 5,
62, 63,
64
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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, 4, 5,
64 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Page 260 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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?
2, 4, 5,
17, 62,
64
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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?
4, 5,
64 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
7, 16 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
18 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
The city is generally surrounded by open space, rangeland used for grazing, and other agricultural uses that support a variety of
natural habitats and plant communities. The city’s many creeks provide sheltered corridors that allow local wildlife to move
between habitats and open space areas. The COSE identifies various goals and policies to maintain, enhance, and protect natural
communities within the City’s planning area. These policies include, but are not limited to, protection of listed species and
species of special concern, preservation of existing wildlife corridors, protection of significant trees, and maintaining
development setbacks from creeks.
The project site is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) and is surrounded by developed one- and two-story single-family
residential units to the south, east, and west, undeveloped land to the north, and CAL FIRE Station #12 to the east. The Patricia
Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located 0.5 mile northwest. A creek and associated freshwater forested/shrub
wetland and riparian areas occur on the western portion of the project site and connects to a freshwater emergent wetland on the
northern undeveloped parcel.
According to the Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) conducted by Keven Merk Associates, LLC (KMA; KMA 2020),
there are five plant communities/land use types within the project site. The communities include ornamental vegetation,
developed/ruderal area, riparian habitat, annual grassland, and rock outcrop. KMA identifies the onsite creek as Twin Ridge
Creek, which runs in a north to south direction on the western portion of the project parcel and is a tributary to San Luis Obispo
Creek. The riparian habitat is comprised of native coast live oak and willows (Salix spp.) along with a variety of non-native
ornamental vegetation. The riparian habitat is considered a sensitive natural community by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) and the City’s COSE. The annual grassland that occurs on the project site is periodically used for horse
grazing and is predominantly comprised of non-native species as a result of a history of disturbance. There is one small rock
outcrop in the western portion of the project area that was determined to be a landscape feature rather than a habitat type.
During tree surveys, a total of 177 trees were identified on the project site, which include ornamental species and naturally
occurring native species. Native trees include coast live oak (quercys agrifolia), valley oak (quercus lobata), Southern California
black walnut (juglans California), California bay laurel (Umbellularia california), arroyo willow (salix lasiolepis), and
California holly toyon (heteromeles arbutifolia). A background review for the site identified five special-plant species that have
potential to occur within the project site, with three species—Cambria morning glory, California black walnut (Juglans
californica), and Monterey pine (Pinus radiata)—occurring onsite. Three invertebrate, one reptile, 19 bird, and four mammal
species were considered to have potential to occur on the project site. Fish species are not expected to occur onsite due to the
intermittent nature of the drainage. The project site is considered within Unit SLO-3 of designated critical habitat for the
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). Unit SLO-3 is approximately 116,517 acres in size and identifies a geographic
area that contains features essential for the conservation of the species. Activities on private lands that do not require a federal
Page 261 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
permit are not affected by the critical habitat designation (FWS 2010). The following analysis of biological resources is
primarily based off the BRA conducted by KMA for the project (KMA 2020, KMA 2021).
An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) in January 2021 determined
that a portion of the wetland area supported onsite is considered Waters of the United States (WOTUS) under the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Waters of the State (WOTS) under the state Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
and CDFW.
Special-Status Plant Species
The BRA for the project site determined that there is potential for four special-status plant species to occur onsite, of
which three species (Cambria morning glory, California black walnut, and Monterey pine) were observed onsite.
Potential special-status plant species include California (southern) black walnut (California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR]
4.2, Cambria morning glory (CRPR 4.2), Miles’ milk-vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus; CRPR 1B.2),
and San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover (Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis; CRPR 1B.2). In addition, Monterey pine was
observed within ornamental vegetation onsite and in surrounding neighborhood areas and is considered to be a
CRPR 1B.1 only within its native range of Año Nuevo, Cambria, and the Monterey Peninsula. These species are
considered to have potential to occur onsite based on the presence of suitable soils and habitat conditions.
Focused rare plant surveys were conducted for the project site within all potentially suitable habitat areas in March,
April, and May 2020, which is within the blooming period of these four species with potential to occur onsite. Based
on the findings of the surveys, Miles’ milk-vetch and San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover was not observed during field
surveys and would not be affected by project activities. Cambria morning glory and California black walnut were
observed onsite and are discussed below. In addition, the BRA identifies Monterey pine species present within
ornamental vegetation and is also discussed below.
Cambria Morning Glory
Cambria morning glory was observed within the annual grassland, which comprises the project site to the east of the
onsite wetland and riparian habitat. The occurrences supported low densities with average cover estimated at three
plants per square meter. The four observed occurrences were determined to cover approximately 1,076 sf (100 square
meters) of the project site and approximately 300 plants were present onsite. Construction of the project, including
grading and installation of road and utility improvements, as well as future residential development, would result in the
removal or disturbance of Cambria morning glory. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 are
required to reduce potential impacts to Cambria morning glory. These measures would require implementation of a
Rare Plan Mitigation Program that would establish replanting of Cambria morning glory so that after a 5-year period
there would be no net loss of the plant. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to
a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation.
Monterey Pine
Monterey pine was observed within the ornamental trees onsite and in surrounding neighborhoods. Monterey pine is
considered to be a CRPR 1B.1 species within its native range. The three native stands in California are in Año Nuevo,
Cambria, and the Monterey Peninsula. Similar to the California black walnut, since San Luis Obispo is not within this
species’ native range, the Monterey pine would not be considered a special-status species onsite and no mitigation is
recommended.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
Based on a background review for the project site, 19 bird, three invertebrate, one reptile, and four mammal species
have potential to occur on the project site. No fish species were determined to have potential to occur onsite based on
the intermittent nature of the drainage. The species that have potential to occur onsite are discussed below.
Page 262 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Birds and Bats
The 19 bird species identified as having the potential to occur onsite include bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter
cooperii), ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus
savannarum), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), great egret (Ardea alba), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus),
merlin (Falco columbarius), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), sharp-shinned hawk
(Accipiter striatus), snowy egret (Egretta thula), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), white-tailed kite (Elanus
leucurus), yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttallii), yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus),
San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), and
western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus). The project site is comprised of numerous ornamental and native
trees and other habitat that have the potential for birds or bats to nest or roost in.
Burrowing owls have the potential to occur onsite, as a transient species, during the winter months due to large
grassland habitat to the north of the site. According to CDFW, burrowing owls are rare in the coastal San Luis
Obispo area and are believed to no longer nest in the region (KMA 2021, CDFW 2003). Additionally, the project site
is regularly disturbed (i.e. mowed, grazed) which reduces the potential for burrowing owl to stop at the site as this
species is highly sensitive to human activity, and the project site is located within an existing residential
neighborhood. Additionally, wintering habitat for burrowing owl has the potential to be disturbed during proposed
groundwork activity.
The project would remove 13 non-native trees within the riparian habitat, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees and
one eucalyptus tree. Removal of trees for parcel upgrades and future development have the potential for accidental take
or other indirect affects to bird species in the area. Additionally, as noted in the Initial Study circulated for public
review, wintering habitat for burrowing owl has the potential to be disturbed during proposed groundwork activity.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3 through BIO-7 would reduce impacts to nesting or roosting birds and
bats that could be present at the project site. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce project impacts
on birds to a level that is considered less than significant with mitigation.
Reptiles
The northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra) is a CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC) and occurs in a
variety of habitats with soil moisture and cover. Suitable habitat for this species is present in the riparian habitat and
marginally in the ornamental vegetation onsite. While no construction activity is proposed within the riparian habitat,
non-native acacia trees within the riparian corridor and adjacent native and ornamental vegetation outside of the riparian
corridor would be removed, and therefore could impact California legless lizard. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-4 through BIO-7 would reduce impacts to northern California legless lizard to a level that is considered
less than significant with mitigation.
Invertebrates
The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is considered a sensitive species by the CDFW and is a candidate species
under the Endangered Species Act. Milkweed is required as a host plant for caterpillar species, which was not observed
onsite; however, individual species were observed flying overhead during surveys. The density of trees in the riparian
habitat could potentially be suitable habitat as an overwintering or autumnal site. Tree removal is proposed for parcel
upgrades and could affect monarch butterfly species present onsite. While eucalyptus is a typical tree species that
supports monarch butterfly overwintering, removal of the one eucalyptus tree and 13 non-native trees from the
riparian corridor would not have a substantial adverse effect on monarch butterfly overwintering populations, and
restoration of the creek corridor and adjacent areas would include the replanting and establishment of native species,
including Cambria morning glory onsite, that would provide protected foraging habitat onsite and potential
overwintering or autumnal habitat for this species in the long-term within the riparian corridor. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would require vegetation removal to occur outside of the overwintering season; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus) does not have a specific listing status but is considered sensitive in the
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and is a species of local concern. The BRA identified that host plants
for these species are located in riparian habitat onsite. The riparian habitat would have a 20-foot setback and minimal
Page 263 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
work within the setback would be required. However, acacia tree removal is proposed within the riparian habitat that
has the potential to disturb obscure bumble bee species present within the riparian habitat. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-4 through BIO-8 would reduce impacts to obscure bumble bee species to a level that is considered less
than significant with mitigation.
The San Luis Obispo pyrg (Pyrgulopsis taylori) is an aquatic snail that is considered sensitive by CNDDB but does not
have a specific listing status. The species inhabits freshwater habitat, which is present at the onsite creek. Project
activities do not propose alteration or disturbance of the creek that could adversely affect San Luis Obispo pyrg species
potentially present. Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and sedimentation within the creek
habitat would be sufficient to avoid impacts to potential species present onsite. Standard BMPs are identified in
Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and would reduce impacts to the San Luis Obispo pyrg to a level that is considered less than
significant with mitigation.
Designated Critical Habitat
The project site is considered designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS). The area is Unit SLO-3 Willow and Toro Creeks to San Luis Obispo and comprises approximately
116,517 acres. The unit occurs along the San Luis Obispo Coast, north of Morro Bay, and extends southeast into the
city of San Luis Obispo. Critical habitat areas identify a geographic area that contains features essential for the
conservation of the species. Activities on private lands that do not require a federal permit are not affected by the
critical habitat designation. However, listed species, such as red-legged frog, and their habitats, are protected by the
Endangered Species Act regardless of whether they occur in a designated critical habitat or not. (FWS 2010).
The BRA concluded that the project site does not provide suitable aquatic breeding habitat for California red-legged
frog. The onsite drainage portion of Twin Ridges Creek is intermittent and does not contain water of sufficient depth
long enough for California red-legged frog larvae to complete metamorphosis. At the time of the March 2020 site visit,
only one small pool was identified with less than six inches of standing water. No emergent wetland vegetation was
present, and wetland vegetation along the channel consisted of vernal marsh species, which indicated a lack of
permanent inundation (KMA 2021). In addition, the stream lacks any significant pools and does not contain sufficient
depth to support adult frogs. Typical breeding habitat is associated with still or slow-moving water that is more than
two feet in depth and is surrounded by dense, shrubby riparian or emergent vegetation. Additionally, breeding pools
maintain water at least into July (KMA 2021). Based on the site visit and aerial photography of the site vicinity, there
are no other potential breeding ponds nearby that could support California red-legged frog.
Annual grassland and ornamental habitats are considered suitable upland and dispersal habitat for California red-legged
frog if there are aquatic breeding sites within one mile that are not separated by barriers to dispersal.; however, the
The nearest record of California red-legged frog is 0.4 mile at Brizziolari Creek, which is separated from the project
site by SR 1, which is a barrier to movement and dispersal to and from the project site. The project site does not
provide connections to other suitable aquatic sites and is surrounded by urban development to the south, west, and east.
A comment received on the draft MND suggested that a perennial portion of Twin Ridges Creek exists downstream
of the project site and could potentially provide suitable habitat for California red-legged frog. The identified segment
is not mapped in the National Wetlands Inventory but is identified on a 1965 San Luis Obispo U.S. Geologic Survey
topographic quadrangle as an intermittent stream that originates on the east side of Bishop Peak (KMA 2021). This
drainage was visited by the project biologist, Kevin Merk, on June 10, 2021. The drainage originates from a storm
drainpipe and has a small pool at the outfall (6 feet wide, 14 feet long, and 4 inches deep). Based on channel
morphology and evidence of past flow events, this pool would likely reach a maximum depth of 18 inches (1.5 feet),
which is less than the 2 feet of depth observed at typical breeding sites for California red-legged frog. Two additional
pools occur downstream from this outfall pool, with water two to three inches deep and no flow between the pools.
The maximum size of these pools is estimated at 3 feet by 5 feet, and 6 inches deep, and 2 feet by 3 feet and 4 inches
deep; therefore, both pools would have a maximum depth less than the 2 feet of depth observed at typical breeding
sites for California red-legged frog.
Page 264 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 25 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
As noted in the supplemental memorandum prepared by KMA (2021), residential structures are present along the
top of bank and the streambank below the homes is armored with stacked concrete sacks. Extensive cover of
nonnative English ivy occurs throughout the area. Sparse wetland plants were observed in the channel and consisted
of a small patch of sedges with taller riparian canopy cover comprised mostly of willows. This native amphibian
needs deep enough water to dive into to escape predators such as raccoons and wading birds (USFWS, 2002;
Jennings and Hayes, 1994 [as cited in the KMA, 20210 memorandum). The non-native bullfrog is also a known
predator of California red-legged frog. When California red-legged frog tadpoles are found in streams they are in
large pools with emergent wetland plants, overhanging riparian vegetation in contact with the water or undercut
banks that provide the necessary hiding places to avoid predation so they can develop into young adults (USFWS,
2002; KMA personal observation). Although water persisted in the small culvert outfall pool until June in a drought
year, it is too shallow and limited in extent even at the estimated bank full stage to support California red-legged frog
breeding requirements. The segment of the drainage on the project site and extending further upstream to another
culverted section that daylights from under urban development along Skyline Drive naturally dries in the summer
and does not have any in-channel pools with suitable depth to support red-legged frogs. The commenter identified
this as the “spring origin”, and it appears to be another outfall of the culverted creek that has become overgrow n
with weedy vegetation including several Canary Island palm trees. Additionally, there is no downstream habitat for
California red-legged frog as Twin Ridges Creek goes into an open concrete channel downstream from Highland
Drive (City 2014). Moreover, no records of California red-legged frogs are present from Stenner Creek or San Luis
Obispo Creek within the downtown area where individuals could breed and disperse through the creek corridor onto
the site (CDFW 2021).
In conclusion, these pools are too shallow (less than 2 feet in maximum depth) and do not provide enough
overhanging riparian vegetation in contact with the water or banks to provide necessary shelter from the elements
and predation for red-legged frog tadpoles to develop into young adults.
Therefore, the site is considered to have low potential for breeding habitat or upland and dispersal habitat for California
red-legged frog within the designated critical habitat and impacts would be less than significant.
The project site supports identified special-status plants and wildlife species that could be affected by the proposed
project. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-9 would reduce or avoid potential
impacts to biological resources present onsite; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project site contains a riparian forest along the onsite creek located in the western portion the property. The BRA
identifies the riparian habitat as a Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest Community, which has a State Rarity Rank
of 3.2. The identified riparian forest consists of native riparian trees and shrubs, which includes coast live oak, red
willow (Salix laevigata), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), toyon, California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica),
interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and California black walnut (Juglans californica). Non-native species also occur
in the riparian habitat, including blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), silver wattle (Acacia dealbata), firethorn (Pyracantha
sp.), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and English ivy (Hedera helix). Native understory plants present within
the riparian area include poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis). A separate
wetland community was observed in the riparian area, which includes spikebrush (Eleocharis macrostachya), brown-
headed rush (Juncus phaeocephalus), tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). The project
would require permits described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the riparian area. In addition,
the Fire Protection Plan requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian habitat, resulting in the removal of 13
trees, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees and one eucalyptus tree, within the riparian habitats corridor. The project
would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code (12.24.090) and replace trees at a minimum 1:1 ratio. The
City’s COSE (7.7.9) calls for a creek setback with appropriate separation from the physical top of bank unless there is
no reasonable alternative, in which structures may be permitted to encroach. The proposed TTM shows the extent of
the riparian area and a 20-foot creek setback, which would be further protected by implementation of mitigation measure
BIO-11, which requires recordation of a biological easement on the Final Map and application of creek setback
standards. As noted, improvements including stormwater improvements, removal of non-native trees and plants, and
restoration activities would be allowed within the easement area. No paving or structures would be permitted in the
Page 265 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 26 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
biological easement area, however, grading activity is proposed in several areas within the creek setback for
stabilization, and placement of rip rap pads are proposed within or adjacent to the setback. The easement and application
of creek setback standards would affect proposed Lots 1–8.;.. With implementation of the identified mitigation measure,
the project would reduce impacts to the riparian area onsite and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance, including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill,
which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse
effects to water quality. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies construction BMPs to reduce potential runoff from the
project site that could adversely affects nearby water resources. In addition, an Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
was prepared by SWCA (SWCA 2021) as required by the BRA and determined that Twin Ridge Creek is likely non-
wetland WOTUS and waters of the state. Twin Ridge Creek likely falls under the USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB
jurisdictions due to the presence of clearly definable ordinary high-water marks, bank and bed features, riparian
vegetation, and hydrologic connectivity to San Luis Obispo Creek. Twin Ridge Creek does not meet the definition of a
wetland because it does not support hydric soils or consistent indicators of wetland hydrology. The Aquatic Resources
Delineation determined that 0.14 acre of Twin Ridge Creek is potentially under the jurisdiction of the USACE and 0.70
acre of the riparian area is potentially under the jurisdiction of the RWQCB and CDFW. The project identifies a 20-
foot setback from the riparian edge in accordance with the City’s COSE, and this area would be further protected from
future development by implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-11, which would create a biological easement;
however, some grading activity and placement of rip rap pads would occur within or adjacent to the creek setback, and
several non-native trees would be removed from within the riparian corridor for fire safety. The project would require
permits described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the jurisdictional areas (streambed and
riparian corridor). With implementation of the identified mitigation measures, potential impacts to the riparian area
onsite would be reduced and impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation.
The project site is located near an area designated as a wildlife corridor within the COSE. The proposed property
subdivision, utility connections, and subsequent future development of new residences would not introduce a substantial
new barrier to wildlife passing through the area because they would be located outside of the designated wildlife
corridor.
Regarding common wildlife, the project site is zoned for residential development, and is surrounded on three sides
by the existing residential neighborhood, and the Cal Fire facility is located to the northeast. One existing residence
is currently located on Stanford Drive. The vacant land to the north of the site is located along State Route 1 and
connects to larger areas of largely vacant land, rural developments, and open space to the north and west. While
common wildlife adapted to urban development may approach the project site and surrounding neighborhood,
development of the project site would not block or inhibit wildlife movement throughout the larger undeveloped and
open space lands that extend from the City to the coastline (approximately 8.5 miles to the west). Furthermore, the
project incorporates a 20-foot setback from the riparian corridor that will be enhanced by the removal of non-native
trees and the planting of native vegetation, and wildlife that currently uses this corridor to access the larger areas to
the north would not be blocked or inhibited by the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed residential development
of the 4.98-acre site would not 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.
Public comment was received regarding concern that the removal of trees within the riparian corridor would
decrease roosting habitat for raptors. The proposed project would include the removal of only non-native species for
fire protection, and potential short-term impacts to nesting birds is discussed above (see [a]) and mitigation is
identified to reduce these potential short-term impacts to less than significant (Mitigation Measures BIO-3 through
BIO-7). In the long-term, the riparian corridor would be replanted with native trees, shrubs, and grasses and
protected in perpetuity. Therefore, the habitat condition of the riparian corridor will improve overall area that is
occupied by native riparian habitat will increase. The onsite grassland area is currently disturbed and does not
represent high quality foraging habitat given its limited area and proximity to existing urban development. Raptors
would still be able to utilize trees along the riparian corridor and in the surrounding area for perches even with the
Page 266 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 27 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
development of the proposed project. The BRA determined that the onsite creek, Twin Ridge Creek, does not support
fish species due to the intermittent nature of the drainage; therefore, project activities do not have the potential to
interfere with the movement of migratory fish species within the creek. However, according to the BRA, Twin Ridge
Creek is a tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek and potential erosive runoff from the project has the potential to degrade
water quality and fish species within San Luis Obispo Creek. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies BMPs for
construction activity to reduce potential erosion and sedimentation from entering the onsite creek, which would reduce
the potential for erosion and sedimentation to enter San Luis Obispo Creek. In addition, implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO-11 would create a permanent biological easement and application of a 20-foot setback standard from the
riparian edge, which would be consistent with the City’s Municipal Code (17.70.030). Future development would be
consistent with the City’s Municipal Code (17.70.030) and implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 would reduce
impacts to the movement of migratory or native species; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
The project site supports Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest and other native and non-native trees. The project site
contains 177 ornamental and native trees, primarily within the riparian corridor. The project would remove all 73 trees
located outside the riparian corridor including 15 native coast live oak trees and 1 southern California black walnut tree
(tree numbers 1-62, 85-91, 173-177 as shown in Appendix D of Attachment 3 and Sheet C2 of Attachment 2).
Additionally, the Fire Protection Plan for the proposed project requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian
habitat. A total of 13 non-native trees, primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees, within the riparian corridor would be
removed (tree numbers 114, 148-157, 162, 169, as shown in Appendix D of Attachment 3 and Sheet C2 of Attachment
2).
The project would result in the removal of 86 trees total onsite. Of the 86 trees proposed for removal, 51 trees are subject
to the City’s Tree Ordinance, due to species, trunk size, or location within a creek setback. Based on the compensatory
tree planting requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the applicant will be required to replant a minimum of one new
tree onsite, or two offsite, for each of the 51 being removed, as set forth in the City Municipal Code (12.24.090). This
application is subject to review and approval by the City Tree Committee. The project would not result in a conflict
with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project is not located within an area governed by an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved state, regional, or local habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would
not conflict with the provisions of an adopted plan and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria morning glory on the
project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria
morning glory and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading
activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites
shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area
(as designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that will be
maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be
maintained as grassland habitat and no planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as
grazing activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the areas
currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square-feet of habitat
impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum 1:1
replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and stored
for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation site should be
prepared for planting by removal of non-native species or other measures as necessary, then applying the salvaged
topsoil. Once topsoil has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-broadcasted into
suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be incorporated into the native
Page 267 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 28 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table under Mitigation Measure BIO-9
and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort. Depending on the season when
construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e., dig them up when soils are moist)
and transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5 years to ensure no net loss
of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of
planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species
onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300
Cambria morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess the areal cover
of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately
300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial
actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding
additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation effort could
include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed
application, or supplemental irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort and monitoring effort. The
applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of each
year) for the 5-year monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing owl has been recorded in
the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for the
tract improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and no
further mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to
avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading
work must commence during the time period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys
for this species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior to vegetation
removal or tract improvements.
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by special-status wildlife species
until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal, ground-
disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey the project
impact area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering populations, obscure
bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be conducted for any phase
of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous phase (i.e., structure
demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate survey techniques for the
special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to occur onsite. For example, burrows shall
be examined with binoculars or wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or prey remains. Leaf litter and
cover objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat roost sites shall be inspected
for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these species are found onsite, the biologist shall
coordinate with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the successful relocation of individuals
to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating structures for displaced woodrats and
bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or occupied burrows can be avoided until the
owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites by placing netting over their entrances after they have
left the roost for night-time foraging. The wildlife protection measures to be employed will be based on the results
of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use of the site, in coordination with CDFW and the
construction engineer. If no special-status animal species are found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work
may proceed with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
Page 268 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 29 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any vegetation removal or tract
improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be
presented to all project personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological
resources. It shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their
natural history, the status of the species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be
found on the project site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to protect
wildlife, including:
1. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
2. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project site for one or more
overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for wildlife before
the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
3. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that may
have sheltered under or within the materials;
4. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
5. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches deep;
6. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be
detected in the work site;
7. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to meet air quality standards and
protect biological resources; and
8. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g., cigarette
butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated
for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to delineate the allowable work
area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract
improvements, and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction
fence at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along
the creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground
disturbance occur within the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC
Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation,
wildlife exclusion, and siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for
needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property is cleared and graded,
and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and
vegetation that may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting
sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or CDFW shall
be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
Page 269 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 30 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering season. Vegetation removal
within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October
through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species
potentially inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following erosion and sedimentation
control BMPs are required to be implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual lot
construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
1. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by scheduling construction to
occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence
to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
2. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be restricted to established roads,
construction areas, and other designated staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked as
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
3. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot construction, a Sediment and
Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles, erosion
control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be employed
to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation
shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other
stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and erosion control
measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the initiation of site grading if planned
to occur within the rainy season.
4. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in place.
5. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas, riparian habitat and/or
drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground
covers are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction staging areas shall be located in a
location where spills would not drain into aquatic habitats.
6. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate containment system.
Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could
enter onsite drainages.
7. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other state and
federal legislation.
8. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project site should be cleaned up
immediately.
9. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection
BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion
and sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
10. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project engineer in consultation with
a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas to
blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
Page 270 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 31 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed
mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either direct hand seeding or
hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species Application Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a compensatory mitigation
program, and monitor the success of the program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or other
waters on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas delineated as
jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide documentation
to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality
Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory agencies to not be required.
If regulatory permits are required, Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, City of San Luis Obispo
stormwater and water quality requirements, and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to the creek.
The monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits of work in
relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as described in Mitigation
Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within this buffer,
the monitor shall direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian habitat during
site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of the rip rap pad and any other work
within the creek setback area on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal of non-native tree
species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to the City and the
biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting riparian area: A Biological
Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation.
The easement agreement shall be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following
activities are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the City Sustainability
and Natural Resources Official:
1. Stormwater improvements.
2. Removal of non-native trees.
3. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek setback standards shall be
applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code requirements.
Page 271 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 32 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Conclusion
The project site supports native and ruderal plant species as well as Cambria morning glory, which is a special-status plant
species, and several riparian and ornamental tree species. The site also supports special-status wildlife habitat that could be
affected by the proposed project. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce or avoid impacts to special-status plants
and wildlife species. A wetland area is supported on the western portion of the project area and a 20-foot setback would be
implemented from the riparian edge of the area. In addition, mitigation has been identified to reduce impacts to construction
activity within the riparian area. Tree removal associated with the project would be mitigated through compliance with the City’s
Tree Ordinance but could result in impact to nesting birds and roosting bats. Compliance with existing regulations would ensure
impacts to riparian habitats and sensitive natural communities would be less than significant. With implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1 through BIO-11, project 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? 19, 20 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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 city is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost
of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County; the earliest evidence
of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. The project site is not located within a Burial
Sensitivity Area as identified in COSE Figure 1: Cultural Resources.
Historic Setting
The COSE establishes various goals and policies to balance cultural and historical resource preservation with other community
goals. These policies include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Identification, preservation, and rehabilitation of significant historic and architectural resources;
2. Prevention of demolition of historically or architecturally significant buildings unless doing so is necessary to remove
a threat to health and safety;
3. Consistency in the design of new buildings in historical districts to reflect the form, spacing , and materials of nearby
historic structures; and
4. Identification and protection of neighborhoods or districts having historical character due to the collective effect of
Contributing or Master List historic properties.
Page 272 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 33 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project site is not located within the Historic Preservation (H) Overlay Zone, nor does it contain any built structures that
may be considered potentially eligible historic resources.
The following analysis of Cultural Resources is predominately based on the Cultural Resources Survey conducted by Central
Coast Archaeological Resource Consultants (CCARC) for the project site (CCARC 2020).
The project proposes to demolish the two existing residential structures located on the project site; however, the
residential units were not determined to have historical significance by the Cultural Resources Survey conducted for
the project. Therefore, the project site does not currently contain, nor is it located near, any historic resources identified
in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The project
site is not identified on the City’s Historic 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 impacts would be less than
significant.
The Cultural Resources Report conducted by CCARC in February 2020 concluded that despite the project site’s location
on land with moderate archaeological sensitivity, desktop review and an intensive archaeological field survey of the
project site did not identify any cultural resources. Based on this conclusion, no further archaeological survey is
necessary for the project site. However, based on the large scale of grading and earthwork required for the project,
Mitigation Measure CR-1 has been identified to identify the proper procedures and contact in the event an inadvertent
discovery of an archaeological or historical resource is made. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 would
reduce impacts in the event an archaeological resource is uncovered during excavation and other groundwork activities
during project construction; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project site is not located within a Burial Sensitivity Area associated with San Luis Obispo Creek identified in
COSE Figure 1: Cultural Resources. 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 California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 and is detailed in Mitigation Measure CR-2. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2, potential
impacts to human remains would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical or archaeological remains
are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall
be issued, and the City 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. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map
and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities
associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development
Director shall be notified. California 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 PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Conclusion
Based on the records search conducted through the Central Coast Information Center, no known historical or archaeological
resources are present onsite. Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been identified above to require appropriate protocol for
inadvertent resource discovery and discovery of human remains. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2
identified above, potential impacts to cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant.
Page 273 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 34 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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?
21, 22,
23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
21, 22,
23 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
PG&E has historically been the primary electricity provider for the City. In October 2018, the City Council committed to joining
the Monterey Bay Community Power (MBCP) and, beginning in January 2020, MBCP became the City’s primary electricity
provider. In September 2020, MBCP became Central Coast Community Energy (3CE); 3CE will strive to provide 100% carbon-
free electricity to utility customers within the city by 2030, and provides a rate savings relative to PG&E.
The City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which encourages clean, efficient, and cost-
effective all-electric new buildings through incentives and local amendments to the California Energy Code. When paired with
cost-comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free electricity from 3CE, all-electric new buildings are operationally
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions free, cost effective, and help achieve the community’s climate action goals. Unlike other cities
that are banning natural gas entirely, the proposed Clean Energy Choice Program encourages clean, efficient, and cost-effective
all-electric new buildings through incentives, local amendments to the California Energy Code, and implementation of the
Carbon Offset Program. New projects wishing to use natural gas will be required to build more efficient and higher performing
buildings and offset natural gas use by performing retrofits on existing buildings or by paying an in-lieu fee that will be used for
the same purpose.
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of
materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real
property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards for residential and nonresidential structures, the most recent
version of which are referred to as the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These standards focus on four key areas:
smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the
exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements.
The 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 of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery 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. The Climate Action Plan was
updated in August 2020.
During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment.
The energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar
construction activities in the city. Current federal and state regulations require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles and
prohibit wasteful activities, such as diesel idling; therefore, potential impacts associated with construction energy use
would be less than significant.
Page 274 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 35 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Specific development plans are currently unknown; however, it can be assumed that each parcel will be developed as a
single-family residential use, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Based on this assumption, the project
would result in an overall increase in consumption of energy resources associated with vehicle trips and electricity and
natural gas usage by future project occupants. The project would be designed in full compliance with the CBC and the
City’s adopted amendments (Title 15 of the Municipal Code), including applicable green building standards, ensuring
a high standard for energy efficiency in building design, materials, light fixtures, and appliances. The project would rely
on the local electricity service provider, 3CE, to supply project electricity needs. Compliance with existing regulations
would ensure the project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Through use of 100% GHG-free electricity resources, project energy
use would not result in a significant environmental impact; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project would be designed in full compliance with the CBC and the City’s adopted amendments (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), including applicable green building standards. The project would be consistent with energy goals and
policies in the COSE associated with use of best available practices in energy conservation. The project would be
consistent with other goals and policies set forth in the Climate Action Plan associated with renewable energy or energy
efficiency, including the provision of compact, high-density housing. Therefore, the project would not result in a conflict
with, or obstruction of, a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Future development would be designed in full compliance with applicable energy efficiency standards and would not conflict
with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No potentially significant impacts related to energy would
occur, and no mitigation measures are necessary.
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.
1, 2, 3,
23, 24,
25
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 1, 2,
23, 24,
25
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 1, 2, 3,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? 1, 2, 3,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 275 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 36 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1, 2, 3,
23, 27 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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, 2, 3,
23, 26,
27, 28
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 2, 3,
23, 27,
28
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 2, 3,
8, 23 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
1, 2,
59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Safety Element identifies active, potentially active, and inactive mapped and inferred
faults with the potential to affect the city in the event of rupture. The Los Osos Fault, adjacent to the city of San Luis Obispo, is
identified under the State of California Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazards Act and is classified as active. The West Huasna, Oceanic,
and Edna Faults are considered 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 g round shaking is
found on deep soils that were deposited by water, are geologically recent, and have many pore spaces among the soil grains.
These soils are typically found in valleys.
Faults capable of producing strong ground-shaking motion in San Luis Obispo include the Los Osos, Point San Luis, Black
Mountain, Rinconada, 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 DOC Fault Activity Map and
the Safety Element Earthquake Faults – Local Area map, the project site is not located within or within the immediate vicinity
of an active fault zone.
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR), San Luis Obispo lies within the southern
Coast Range Geomorphic Province. This province lies between the Central Valley of California and the Pacific Ocean and
extends from Oregon to northern Santa Barbara County. The Coast Range province is structurally complex and comprised of
sub-parallel northwest–southeast trending faults, folds, and mountain ranges.
Rock types in the San Luis Obispo area are mainly comprised of volcanic rock, metavolcanic rock, and a mixture of serpentinite
and greywacke sandstone. These rocks are highly fractured and are part of the Mesozoic-aged Franciscan Formation. Intrusive
and extrusive volcanic deposits of Tertiary-age and marine sedimentary deposits of the Miocene-aged Monterey Formation are
also found in the area. The most distinctive geomorphological feature of the San Luis Obispo area is the series of Tertiary-aged
volcanic plugs (remnants of volcanoes), known as the Nine Sisters or the Morros, that extend from the city of San Luis Obispo
northwesterly to the city of Morro Bay. Hollister Peak, Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, Islay Hill, and Morro Rock are all
comprised of these volcanic plugs.
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 lubri cating
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 gro und. The
Page 276 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 37 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake. Based on the Ground Shaking and Landslide
Hazards Map in the Safety Element, the project site is not located within an area of 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 Safety Element, the project site is located within an area with
moderate 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 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Areas of Land Subsidence in California Map, the project site
is not located in an area of known subsidence.
Soil-Limiting Factors
The project site is underlain by Los Osos-Diablo complex (9 to 15 percent slopes) and Cropley clay (2 to 9 percent slopes) soil
units. The Los Osos-Diablo complex is characterized as well drained with a very high runoff class and Cropley clay is
characterized as moderately drained with a moderate runoff class. The project site is underlain by soils that are predominantly
clayey and would have a moderate to high shrink/swell potential as a result. The slope of the project site is generally flat to
slightly sloping, with an average of 8 percent slopes. Foundations and footings should be designed to offset shrink-swell potential,
and the low strength of the clay subsoil. These soil characteristics can require that the subgrade be removed and replaced with a
more suitable material or that a high degree of compaction and moisture control be maintained.
a.i) The project site is located approximately 2.8 miles east from the Los Osos Fault Zone and 1.9 miles west from the
Cambria fault zone. There are no fault lines that run under or adjacent to the project site; therefore, direct impacts related
to fault rupture are not anticipated. Because San Luis Obispo is located in a seismically active region, it has adopted
building standards to protect structures and individuals. Development plans are not currently specified; however, future
development of the proposed parcels would be designed to comply with the CBC (including Title 15 amendments) and
other applicable guidelines. 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, iii) As discussed in (a.i) above, San Luis Obispo is located in a seismically active region where there is always the potential
for ground shaking. According to Section 1613 of the 2019 CBC, all structures and portions of structures are required
to be designed to resist the effects of seismic loadings caused by earthquake ground motions. Future residential units
developed at the project site would comply with the CBC and other applicable regulations for earthquake hazards.
According to the City’s Safety Element, soils found at the project site have a low potential for liquefaction risk.
Assuming that any and all future development of the project site is compliant with CBC and other federal and state
regulations, the potential to result in substantial adverse effects involving seismic ground shaking and ground-related
failure would be less than significant.
a.iv) According to the City’s Ground Shaking & Landslide Hazards Map, the project site is located in an area that has a low
risk for landslides. The project area is comprised of predominantly flat to slightly sloping land and does not consist of
moderate to steep slopes that would increase risk for landslides at the proposed site. Future developments would comply
with the CBC, which requires, at a minimum, a soils report for new residential development, and other applicable
regulations to reduce the potential for the project to result in substantial adverse effects involving landslides to less than
significant.
b) Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill,
which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse
effects to water quality. Additionally, the project would remove 86 trees, including 13 non-native trees within the
Page 277 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 38 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
riparian corridor. The project proposes to disturb more than one-acre of soil and would require the preparation and
implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with BMPs to avoid or reduce erosive or polluted
runoff from entering the onsite creek and associated wetland area. Section 4, Biological Resources, identifies Mitigation
Measure BIO-9, which outlines BMPs that would reduce construction impacts related to erosive runoff. Project
development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-
Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
Future development as a result of the subdivision will be single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses, potential removal of additional existing trees, and connections to the proposed utility lines.
Grading activity for future development is proposed for current parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future
development would require more than one-acre of groundwork and would not need to develop and implement a SWPPP.
However, future development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB Post-Construction
Requirements (PCRs), and physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage
requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water
quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. Therefore, through implementation of Mitigation Measure
BIO-9 and compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to violation of water quality standards would be less
than significant with mitigation.
c) According to the City’s Ground Shaking and Landslide Hazards Map, the project site is not located within an area with
high landslide or liquefaction potential (City of San Luis Obispo 2014). The soils present at the project site currently
support two existing residential units and associated structures and features. Future development would be required to
comply with the CBC and other applicable regulations for building standards. Based on compliance with existing
regulations and Code requirements, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Soils with high shrink/swell potential are predominantly comprised of clay and clay materials. The project site is
underlain by soils that contain clay and clay materials; therefore, the soils have a low to moderate shrink/swell potential.
The volume changes that soils undergo in this cyclical pattern can stress and damage slabs and foundations. Typical
precautionary measures would likely include premoistening the underlying soil in conjunction with placement of non-
expansive material beneath slabs, and a deepened and more heavily reinforced foundation. In addition, future
development facilitated by implementation of this project would be required to be designed in compliance with standard
seismic design criteria established in the CBC to reduce risk associated with ground failure, including from expansive
soils. Therefore, based on compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than
significant.
e) The project would utilize an existing sewage connection and would also include a new connection to the City sewer
system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater treatment systems are proposed onsite. Therefore, no impacts would
occur.
f) The project site is underlain late Mesozonic sandstones and shales, early to mid-Cenozonic siltstones, igneous and
intrusive rock, and quaternary alluvium (CCARC 2020). There are no known paleontological resources on the project
site and there are no unique geologic features on the property. For subdivision improvements, 4.27 acres of grading and
excavation activity are proposed (i.e., road improvements and utility trenching), and future residential foundations will
likely remove expansive soils to comply with the CBC. Based on the low sensitivity of the underlying geologic unit, the
lack of proposed activities that would result in significant cuts into bedrock, and the surrounding developed areas, the
project would not have the potential to result in impacts to a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature,
and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-9.
Conclusion
Based on the location of the project site and underlying geologic and soil properties, and compliance with existing regulatio ns,
potential impacts would be less than significant. Parcel improvements have the potential to result in erosion and sedimentation
Page 278 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 39 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
that could runoff into nearby water resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and compliance with existing
regulations would reduce construction impacts related to erosion and impacts to Geology and Soils would be less than significant.
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?
11, 12,
22, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
11, 12,
22, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
GHGs are any gases that absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, and are different from the criteria pollutants discussed in
Section 3, Air Quality, above. The primary GHGs that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activities are carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. In 2012, the City established a Climate Action Plan
that identified measures and implementation strategies in order to achieve the City’s GHG reduction target of 1990 emission
levels by 2020. The City’s Climate Action Plan was recently updated and outlines a plan for achieving carbon neutrality by 2035.
The City’s 2016 Community Wide GHG emissions inventory showed that 63% of the city’s GHG emissions came from
transportation, 13% came from commercial and industrial uses, 11% came from residential uses, and 13% from waste.
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 AB 32, SB 375, and SB 97, as
well as the Clean Car Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, CBC, and California Solar Initiative.
The City recently updated its Climate Action Plan. The plan establishes a community-wide goal of carbon neutrality by 2035,
adopts sector specific goals, and provides foundational actions to establish a trajectory towards achieving those goals. Appendix
C of the Climate Action Plan Update includes thresholds and guidance for the preparation of GHG emissions analysis under
CEQA for projects within the City. To support progress toward the City’s long‐term aspirational carbon neutrality goal, plans
and projects within the City that undergo CEQA review will need to demonstrate consistency with targets in the Climate Action
Plan, a qualified GHG reduction strategy, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. According to the adopted
SLOAPCD guidance, if a project is consistent with a qualified GHG reduction strategy, such as the City’s Climate Action Plan,
the project would not result in a significant impact.
In October 2018, the City Council committed to joining 3CE, an existing community choice energy program that serves the
counties of Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey and provides 100% carbon-free electricity with a rate savings relative to
PG&E. Additionally, the City recently adopted the Clean Energy Choice Program for New Buildings, which encourages clean,
efficient, and cost effective all-electric new buildings through incentives and local amendments to the California Energy Code.
When paired with cost comparable modern electric appliances and carbon-free electricity from 3CE, all-electric new buildings
are operationally GHG emissions free, are cost effective, and help achieve the community’s climate action goals.
a, b) Construction-related activities that would generate GHG emissions include worker trips and hauling trips to and from
the project site, as well as off-road construction equipment (e.g., dozers, loaders, excavators). Construction activity also
requires 4.27 acres of ground disturbance that has the potential to generate ROG and NOx, which are ozone precursors.
Impacts related to GHG emissions occur on a global scale and are, therefore, cumulative in nature. Short-term
construction-related emissions rarely result in a considerable contribution to GHG emissions. Operational-related
activities that would typically generate GHG emissions include residential trips, solid waste disposal, and energy
consumption.
Page 279 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 40 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The demographic forecasts and land use assumptions of the Climate Action Plan are based on the City’s LUCE. 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. The project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designation for the existing parcel;
therefore, the project is expected to be consistent with the demographic and land use assumptions used for the
development of the City’s latest Climate Action Plan.
As discussed previously, the City recently adopted the 2020 Climate Action Plan, which identifies six pillars, each of
which include long-term goals, measures, and foundational actions for reducing GHG emissions throughout the city.
The pillars include:
1. Leading by Example: Create a Municipal Action Plan by 2020 and achieve carbon-neutral government
operations by 2030.
2. Clean Energy Systems: Achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by 2020.
3. Green Buildings: Generate no net new building emissions from on‐site energy use by 2020 and achieve a 50%
reduction in existing building on‐site emissions (after accounting for 3CE) by 2030.
4. Connected Community: Achieve the General Plan mode split objective by 2030 and have 40% VMT by electric
vehicles by 2030.
5. Circular Economy: Achieve 75% diversion of landfilled organic waste by 2025 and 90% by 2035.
6. Natural Solutions: Increase carbon sequestration on the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt and Urban Forest through
compost application-based carbon farming activities and tree planting to be ongoing through 2035.
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
Climate Action Plan’s GHG emissions reduction strategy. The proposed project does not propose any new buildings
that would be applicable to green building and other energy efficiency standards. Parcel improvements would result in
23 new lots, a new interior connection road, and new utility infrastructure and easements. One of the utility easements
would be 17 feet wide and would also be used as bicycle and pedestrian access to and from the site. The proposed
project has the potential to developed single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses,
that would be subject to energy efficiency standards and could increase population and VMT to the project area. The
project site is located 0.2 mile north from two bus stops, and additional bus stops are located on Foothill Boulevard
approximately 0.5 mile south that would facilitate future residential transit use. In addition, the project is within close
walking or biking distance to nearby retail and services, including grocery stores, restaurants, and medical services
located approximately 0.56 mile away, which is consistent with the updated Climate Action Plan. Based on the City’s
Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is located in an area of the City that would result in average VMT less
than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in this area would result in reduced VMT. Specific
development plans are currently unknown; however, future residential development would likely utilize GHG-free
energy through participation in 3CE and with compliance with the City’s Clean Energy Choice Program for New
Buildings. New development would also be required to comply with applicable green building standards identified in
the updated Climate Action Plan. The project would maintain, where feasible, onsite trees and vegetation and would
plant native vegetation at the project site. Based on design elements of the proposed project, the project would be
consistent with the goals in the updated Climate Action Plan; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project would be located and designed to minimize GHG emissions and would not result in a conflict with an applicable
plan or policy adopted for reducing GHG emissions. The project would be consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan, a
qualified GHG reduction strategy. No potentially significant impacts associated with GHG emissions have been identified, and
no mitigation measures are necessary.
Page 280 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 41 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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, 2
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 2
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 2, 3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
30, 31,
32 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
2, 3,
42, 43 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
1, 2,
23, 25 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Site (Cortese) List is a planning tool 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 EPA (CalEPA) to develop at least annually an updated
Cortese List. Various State and local government agencies are required to track and document hazardous material release
information for the Cortese List. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control (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
that meet the Cortese List requirements are included on the CalEPA website: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
The project does not propose the long-term transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Short-term
construction materials may be transported during development of the proposed improvements to the property and during
future development of one- and two-story single-family residences. Hazardous materials would be properly handled to
according to federal and State regulations, including response and clean-up requirements for any minor spills. Therefore,
potential impacts would be less than significant.
The long-term use of the project would be residential units that would not use hazardous materials other than commonly
used household substances within the project site (e.g., cleaners, solvents, oils, paints, etc.). Construction of the
Page 281 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 42 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
proposed project is anticipated to require 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. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
The project site is located approximately 0.47 mile east of Bishop Peak Elementary School. California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly), is located approximately 500 feet east, across Highway 1. While the project
would be located within 0.25 mile of Cal Poly, the eastern portion of the school property that is closest to the project
site is developed with experimental agricultural crops. The project site is approximately 0.63 mile from the nearest
educational instruction buildings, and approximately 1.0 mile from the onsite residential dormitory areas. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
According to the CalEPA Cortese List resources, including the DTSC EnviroStor and SWRCB GeoTracker databases,
there are no hazardous materials sites on or within 1,000 feet of the project site. Based on the local nature and the
existing and historic traffic levels on Stanford Drive, Cuesta Drive, and Westmont Drive, the potential for these
roadways to contain hazardous levels of aerially deposited lead (ADL) is negligible. No known mining activities have
occurred within or near the project site and no known use of organochlorinated pesticides have occurred. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
The nearest airport is the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, located approximately 4.5 miles south of the project
site. The project is not located within the boundaries of the airport land use plan and project development would not
adversely impact airport operations. Similarly, airport operations would not result in a substantial safety hazard.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The City has identified goals regarding emergency response plans in its Safety Element. The proposed site
improvements for future development include the creation of fire safety measures, including an emergency access
easement and improved access roads. Project development has the potential to create temporary traffic controls to
residential streets but would not result in street closures that would block emergency access. Future development would
be designed to comply with building and fire code regulations, as well as City requirements for fire safety; therefore,
potential impacts would be less than significant.
According to the City’s Wildland Fire Hazards Map, the project is located within a low wildland fire severity zone and
surrounding land is located within a moderate wildland fire severity zone. The nearest fire station is San Luis Obispo
City Fire Station #2, located approximately 0.56 mile south of the project site on Chorro Street. Emergency response
times for the project site are less than 5 minutes. The project would consist of infill development within an existing
neighborhood and would not substantially increase wildfire risks. The project proposes the development of
improvements for fire hazard safety that include an emergency access easement, upgraded roads, necessary water
connections, removal of non-native vegetation and ornamental and native trees, and other measures identified in
Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2, included in Section 20, Wildfire. The future development of residential
structures would follow CBC and other design regulations for fire hazards. Therefore, people and/or structures would
not be exposed to significant risk and the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2.
Conclusion
The project would not result in the routine transportation or storage of hazardous materials. The project is not located on a known
hazardous waste site and is not within close proximity to a school or airport. Potential impacts related to hazards, including
emergency access and wildfire, would be less than significant.
Page 282 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 43 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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?
34, 35,
41, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
37, 38,
39 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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, 41 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or offsite;
1, 36,
41, 65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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, 35,
65 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? 36 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
1, 25,
36, 40 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
37, 38,
39, 41 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
As discussed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, the project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic
Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, an area that corresponds to the coastal draining watersheds west of the Coastal
Range. The Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County
line and includes numerous individual stream systems. Within the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, the San Luis Obispo Creek
watershed drains approximately 84 square miles.
The city of San Luis Obispo is generally located within a low-lying valley centered on San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo
Creek is one of four major drainage features that create flood hazards in the city, with the others b eing Stenner, Prefumo, and
Old Garden Creeks. In addition, many minor waterways drain into these creeks, which can also present flood hazards. Because
of the high surrounding hills and mountains in the area, the drainage sheds of these creeks are relatively small, but the steep
slopes and high gradient can lead to intense, fast-moving flood events in the city. There is an unnamed creek (identified as Twin
Ridge Creek) with associated freshwater forested/shrub wetland and riparian areas located in the western portion of the project
area.
The City is enrolled in the State General Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
governing stormwater. As part of this enrollment, the City is required to implement the Central Coast RWQCB’s adopted Post-
Construction Stormwater Management requirements through the development review process. The primary objective of these
PCRs is to ensure that the permittee is reducing pollutant discharges to the maximum extent practicable and preventing
Page 283 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 44 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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.
The 100-year flood zone identifies areas that would be subject to inundation in a 100-year storm event, or a storm with a 1%
chance of occurring in any given year. Based on the City’s interactive Parcel Viewer and Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) map (06079C1066G, effective 11/16/2012), the project site is located within
an area of minimal flooding and the onsite creek is not a 100-year flood zone hazard.
There is an unnamed creek (identified as Twin Ridge Creek) with associated freshwater forested/shrub wetland and
riparian areas located in the western portion of the project area.
Project improvements propose a 20-foot setback from the riparian edge of the existing vegetation that would reduce
impacts during future development and operation. Proposed project construction requires 4.27 acres of ground
disturbance including 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill, which has the potential to release erosive runoff into the creek
and associated wetland areas that may cause adverse effects to water quality. Parcel improvements require the use of
construction vehicles and equipment that could lead to inadvertent polluted runoff through vehicle leakage or spill. The
project proposes to disturb more than 1 acre of soil and would require the development and implementation of a SWPPP
with BMPs to avoid or reduce erosive or polluted runoff from entering the onsite creek and associated wetland area.
Section 4, Biological Resources, identifies Mitigation Measure BIO-9, which outlines BMPs that would reduce
construction impacts related to polluted or erosive runoff. Project development would be required to comply with the
Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for
Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
Future development as a result of the subdivision would include single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs
as potential accessory uses, potential removal of existing trees, and connections to the proposed utility lines. Grading
activity for future development is proposed for current parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future
development would require more than 1 acre of groundwork and would not likely need to develop and implement a
SWPPP. However, future development would be required to comply with the Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, and
physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s
Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage
within the City’s watershed. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9 during parcel improvements
and compliance with existing regulations, impacts related to violation of water quality standards would be less than
significant with mitigation.
San Luis Obispo is located within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. The Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act (SGMA) requires that high- and medium-priority basins comply with the provisions of the SGMA.
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) designated the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin as
a high-priority basin, and the City has developed a Groundwater Sustainability Plan to comply with SGMA regulations.
The COSE states the urban water planning and usage will use the “most efficient available practices” for water
conservation. The “most efficient available practices” refer to behavior and devices that use the least water for a desired
outcome, considering available equipment, lifecycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations of
other agencies.
Construction of the proposed project and future residential development would result in new development on
previously undeveloped land and would result in an increase of impervious surfaces. Physical improvement of the
project site would be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan.
This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed.
The Waterways Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site
development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-
off. In order to comply with these standards, the project proposes four drainage measures throughout the project
site, which include an 85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration
treatment. The proposed drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface runoff generated
from the project during operation. The project is also required to comply with Post-Construction Stormwater
Management Requirements, including requirements for site design, water quality treatment, runoff retention, and
peak discharge management. These requirements include, and are not limited to, minimizing impervious surfaces,
collecting stormwater runoff to reduce pollutant discharge, and maintaining the pre-developed hydrology by
Page 284 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 45 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
reducing overland flow and promoting groundwater recharge. Therefore, based on compliance with existing
regulations, implementation of the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of
the basin.
Based on the 2020 Water Resources Status Report, the City utilizes multiple water sources to meet its water supply
needs. The four primary water sources for the City includes Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento
Reservoir, and recycled water; groundwater acts as the City’s fifth supplemental source. The total water available for
the City in 2019 was 10,107 acre-feet per year (AFY). As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and
updates to the City’s safe annual yield model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for
the purposes of this analysis. The 2020 Water Year (October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020) had a total water demand
of 4,762 AF with 0% of water being supplied by groundwater resources. Compared against the City’s 2019 annual
availability, the City has approximately 5,374 AF of water surplus available to allocate to new beneficial uses within
the city.
The project would be required to pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s
water resources. Future residential development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential
impacts would be less than significant.
c.i) Project construction requires 4.27 acres of grading activity, which includes 7,900 cy of cut and 4,760 cy of fill. The
project does not propose alteration of the onsite creek; however, the BRA identified that several areas of grading are
proposed within the creek setback and a rip rap pad at the stormwater retention area is planned adjacent to or within the
creek setback area. Additionally, 13 non-native trees would be removed from the riparian corridor. The project proposes
a 20-foot setback from the creek during proposed improvements. However, due to the amount of ground disturbance
proposed for parcel improvements, there is potential for construction activity and permanent impervious surfaces
associated with future development to temporarily alter onsite drainage patterns and disturb the creek channel, which
could increase runoff on- or offsite. The project would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP with BMPs
designed to reduce erosive runoff to surface and other water resources in the area. Mitigation Measure BIO-9 identifies
BMPs that would reduce erosive runoff during project construction. These BMPs include, and are not limited to,
avoiding construction during the rainy season if feasible, preparation of a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan that
would be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, identification of construction staging areas (in locations that
would not drain into the creek), and application of measures that are typically applied and approved by the City and
resource agencies including the RWQCB and CDFW to protect water quality including silt fencing, erosion control
blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials. Mitigation Measure BIO-10 requires that
the applicant comply with existing RWQCB and CDFW regulations, permits, and authorization requirements, and
has been clarified to require a biological monitor during construction activities and work within and adjacent to the
riparian corridor regardless of whether regulatory permits are required, and the on-site monitor would ensure
compliance with all local and state water quality regulations. Verification of the BMPs and Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan and compliance with water quality regulations would occur during review of these
standard plans by City and regulatory agency professionals and experts, and during installation of creek protection
measures and any work within and adjacent to the creek by a biological monitor. The project would also be required
to comply with Central Coast RWQCB requirements set forth in the Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.
The 20-foot setback established during parcel improvements would ensure that future development would not require
work within the onsite stream or associated wetland area. Grading activity for future development is proposed for current
parcel improvements; therefore, it is unlikely that future projects would require more than 1 acre of groundwork;
therefore, future development is not likely to substantially alter any existing drainage patterns that would lead to on- or
offsite erosion. Because future development is not anticipated to disturb more than 1 acre of soils, the preparation and
implementation of a SWPPP is not necessary. However, future development would be required to comply with the
Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, and physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the
drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring
water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. With implementation of BIO-9 and compliance with
existing regulations, impacts related to erosion and siltation on- or offsite would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 285 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 46 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
c.ii–iv) As described in the evaluation above, the project site is not located within a flood zone. However, the proposed parcel
improvements and future development would result in new impervious surface areas that could increase surface water
runoff. Proposed parcel improvements would create a new interior road that loops from Stanford Drive to Cuesta Drive
ranging from 54 to 60 feet in width, a 17-foot-wide AC bicycle/pedestrian pathway that would also be used as a utility
and drainage easement across Lot 15, and other proposed access and easements. Future development plans are currently
unknown; however, it is anticipated that single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory
uses, could be developed as a result of the subdivision, which would create more impervious surface areas.
Construction of the proposed project and future residential development would result in new development on previously
undeveloped land and would result in an increase of impervious surfaces that would cause the timing and amount of
surface water runoff to increase. Physical improvement of the project site would be required to comply with the drainage
requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan, which includes the Drainage Design Manual. This plan was
adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways
Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site development be designed
so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-off. The Drainage Design
Manual states that “runoff shall be managed to prevent any significant increase in downstream peak flows, including
2-year, 10-year, 50-year, and 100-year events. Significant generally means an increase of over 5 percent at and
immediately downstream of the project site, but must be determined on a site-specific basis” (DDM 3.3). In order to
comply with these standards, the project proposes four drainage measures throughout the project site, which include an
85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment. The proposed
drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface runoff generated from the project during operation.
The proposed approach to peak flow management for this project at Twin Ridge Creek involves collecting a portion
of the runoff from the proposed development, detaining that flow in a detention facility, and then introducing it to
Twin Ridge Creek resulting in an overall reduction in peak flow for the system. At Cuesta, the runoff is collected
and detained in an underground detention facility and then released onto the proposed site at Cuesta Drive. The
proposed drainage at Stanford was designed so that the runoff would match existing drainage conditions (Cannon
2020). In addition, the project would be required to comply with the City’s engineering standards, water pollution
control plan requirements, Post-Construction Stormwater Requirements, and adopted building and grading codes for
water quantity/quality analysis. Compliance with these requirements would ensure operational impacts are less than
significant and implementation of BIO-9 would reduce construction-related impacts to potential erosive runoff from
alteration of drainage patterns; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) The proposed project site is not located within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone; therefore, the release of pollutants
due to project inundation is not anticipated, and no impacts would occur.
e) The City’s COSE identifies goals and policies for the City’s water needs, including planning and water quality
management. The proposed project and any future development would be conditioned to comply with the COSE water
quality and groundwater management standards (Section 10). As discussed above, parcel improvements and future
development would be compliant with the Central Coast RWQCB PCRs, the City’s Waterways Management Plan and
LID design requirements, and other applicable water quality policies and regulations. The project would be required to
pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s water resources. Future residential
development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-9.
Conclusion
The proposed project would be subject to City requirements regarding water quality and stormwater runoff. Future residential
structures would be required to comply with the water quality and conservation standards stated in the COSE. The project is not
located within a 100-year flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. Therefore, project impacts on hydrology and water quality would
be less than significant.
Page 286 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 47 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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? 42 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) 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?
5, 42 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Evaluation
The project is zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential) and located in the northern portion of the city. The surrounding land uses
include one- and two-story single-family residential units to the south, east and west, undeveloped residential land to the north,
and CAL FIRE Station #12 to the east.
The proposed project is an infill project and would not have the potential to divide an established community on adjacent
parcels or in the vicinity of the project site. The project is designed to be consistent with existing and developing/planned
surrounding commercial infill development and would not physically divide an established community. Impacts would
be less than significant.
The project site is located within the city of San Luis Obispo and is subject to the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan.
The project is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), and future residential development would be consistent with the
zoning and required to follow design regulations for the zoning requirement (City Ordinances 17.16 and 17.70). Future
development would be consistent with the COSE and other applicable regulations. Mitigation measures identified
throughout this Initial Study would reduce environmental impacts that could conflict with existing regulations and
ensure that future development would be consistent with applicable land use standards and regulations. Therefore,
project impacts would be less that significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures identified in other sections of this Initial Study.
Conclusion
The proposed project would not divide an established community and identified mitigation measures would ensure future
development is consistent with applicable land use plans. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary, and impacts to land use and
planning would be less than significant.
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?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
5 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Page 287 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 48 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Evaluation
Mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits according to the COSE.
a, b) 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 and current restrictions on resource extraction within city limits; therefore, no
impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
According to the COSE, mineral extraction is prohibited within city limits. The project site is located within the city, and there
would be no impact on mineral resources.
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?
8, 43,
44, 45 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? 45 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
3 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
As analyzed in the City’s 2014 LUCE Update EIR, a number of noise-sensitive land uses are present within the city, including
various types of residential development, schools, hospitals and care facilities, parks and recreation areas, hotels and tran sient
lodging, and places of worship and libraries. Based on ambient noise level measurements throughout the city, major sources of
noise include traffic noise on major roadways, passing trains, and aircraft overflights.
Per City Municipal Code Chapter 9.12, Noise Control, operating tools or equipment used in construction on weekdays between
7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or any time on Sundays or holidays is prohibited, except for emergency works of public service utilities
or by exception issued by the City Community Development Department. The City 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 (9.12.050.B.7), 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.
Typical noise levels produced by equipment commonly used for demolition and construction projects are shown in Table 3.
Page 288 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 49 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Table 3. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA)
50 feet From Source
Backhoe 80
Compactor 80
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Dozer 85
Excavator 85
Heavy Truck 84
Paver 85
Scraper 85
The nearest noise sensitive receptors to the project site include existing single-family residential units located adjacent to the site
on the south, west, and east.
Project construction has the potential to increase short-term noise in the surrounding area. Project construction includes
demolition of two existing residential structures onsite, excavation and grading activity, development of a new
connection road, and installation of utility infrastructure and easements. Parcel improvements would be required to
adhere to City Municipal Code Section 22.10.120.A.4, which limits the hours and days of construction equipment use
and seeks to limit construction noise to 85 dBA. Project construction would be conducted in close proximity to
surrounding residential units. The nearest residential unit is located approximately 10 feet from the eastern property
line. In addition, there are residential units to the west and south located within 10 to 15 feet from the property. Due to
the close proximity of nearby residential uses, the proposed demolition and construction project activities have the
potential to periodically exceed the City’s Municipal Code standard for conducting construction activities in such a
manner that prevents noise levels above 75 dBa from reaching residential uses, when technically and economically
feasible. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 have been identified to reduce the potential for exceedances to occur and
minimize potential temporary construction noise impacts to surrounding residential uses.
Upon completion of construction activities, the project would not include any significant stationary noise sources and
would not result in a substantial increase in vehicle noise that would result in an increase to the ambient noise
environment. However, construction activity for future developments would create short-term noise and would be
required to adhere to City Municipal Code Section 22.10.120.A.4 and other applicable regulations. In addition, future
development would be required to implement Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 to mitigate noise from development
activities near existing residential units. Operation of the project would be generally consistent with surrounding existing
uses in the project vicinity and would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Therefore,
upon implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2, potential 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
would be less than significant with mitigation.
The project does not propose pile driving or other high impact activities that would generate substantial groundborne
noise or groundborne vibration during construction. Use of heavy equipment for excavation and other ground
disturbance activity would generate groundborne noise and vibration, but these activities would be limited in duration
and consistent with other standard construction activities and would likely not be substantial enough to be detected by
occupants of surrounding land uses. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan; therefore, no impact
would occur.
Mitigation Measures
Page 289 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 50 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
N-1 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at the project boundaries shall
be shielded with the most modern noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall
be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-air
exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be
used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods
installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance
and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMPs, and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to
commencement of construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction
workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where
BMP measures are to be implemented.
Conclusion
The project has the potential to periodically exceed City Municipal Code construction and operational noise standards for single-
family residential uses. With implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2, potential impacts associated with temporary
exceedances of local established standards would be less than significant. No other potentially significant impacts associated
with noise were identified, and no additional mitigation measures are necessary.
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)?
46 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
1 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The city of San Luis Obispo is the largest city in terms of population in San Luis Obispo County and has grown from 45,119 in
2010 to approximately 48,826 in 2020, according to the City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report 2020 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, during workdays, the city’s population increases to an
estimated 70,000 persons.
Page 290 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 51 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Housing Element identifies various goals, policies, and programs based on an
assessment of the 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. The project site is zoned as R-1 (Low Density Residential).
The project proposes a subdivision of one existing parcel into 23 different parcels, which would have the potential to
support single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Current proposed parcel
improvements would not create structures that would cause population growth. The proposed construction is consistent
with the General Plan, would improve the City’s jobs-housing balance, and would not create substantial unplanned
population growth. Therefore, impacts to significant population growth would be considered less than significant.
The project proposes demolition of the two existing residential units onsite. However, implementation of the project
would create 23 new parcels that will be developed with single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses. Therefore impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The proposed parcel improvements and future development would not substantially increase population growth in the area, nor
would it displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. Future residential development would be consistent with
the R-1 zone and the City’s General Plan, and potential impacts to population and housing would be less than significant.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Sources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? 1, 2,
47, 48,
49
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? 1, 2,
47, 48 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
Page 291 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 52 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project is located in the western portion of the city, 1.5 miles from the city’s downtown. The City of San Luis Obispo Fire
Department (SLOFD) provides emergency response services for the city, including fire and medical, and is comprised of 57 full-
time employees. The SLOFD operates out of four fire stations in the city, with the nearest station to the project located at City
Fire Station #2, 126 North Chorro Street, near the intersection with Foothill Boulevard. The City of San Luis Obispo Police
Department (SLOPD) provides public safety services for the city and is comprised of 85.5 employees, 59 of which are sworn
police officers. The SLOPD operates out of one main police station, which is located at 1042 Walnut Street at the intersection of
Santa Rosa Street (Highway 1) and US 101. The project site 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 Department of Parks
and Recreation.
All new residential and nonresidential development within the city is subject to payment of development impact fees, which are
administered by and paid through the City Community Development Department. Development impact fees provide funding for
maintaining city emergency services, infrastructure, and facilities. For example, fire protection impact fees provide funding for
projects such as the renovation of the City’s fire stations and the replacement of fire service vehicles and equipment.
Fire protection: The project is located within a low fire severity zone and is under local fire jurisdiction. Fire response
times to the project site are less than 5 minutes and the nearest fire station is City Fire Station #2, located 0.56 mile
away. The project would result in single-family residential uses, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses and
would not lead to a substantial increase in population in the city. Implementation of the project would not result in the
need for construction of new or expanded fire protection facilities. In addition, the project would be subject to
development fees for fire protection, which would offset the emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary utility
connections; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Police protection: The SLOPD is located 1.4 miles southeast of the project site on Walnut Street. The project proposes
uses generally consistent with the surrounding area, and the proposed level of development would be similar to
surrounding residential development. The project proposes residential infill development and would not result in a
substantial increase in demand on police protection services. The project would result in a slight increase in residents
within the city and would be consistent with the projected population growth for the city. The project would not result
in a substantial increase in the number of units or population in the city and would not result in the need for construction
of new or expanded police protection facilities. The project would be required to pay development impact fees
established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new development. Therefore, the project impacts
on police protection would be less than significant.
Schools: The project site is located within the SLCUSD and would be subject to payment of SLCUSD development
fees to offset the potential increase in student attendance in the district’s schools as a result of the project. These fees
would be directed towards maintaining sufficient service levels, which include incremental increases in school
capacities. The nearest schools are Bishop Peak Elementary School and Pacheco Elementary School, located less than
1 mile southeast and south of the project site, respectively. San Luis Obispo High School is located 2 miles away. Local
schools have the capacity to support additional students that may cumulate from future residential development plans.
Therefore, the project impacts on schools would be less than significant.
Parks: The Patricia Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located 0.5 mile northwest and Throop Park is
0.4 mile south of the project site. Future development plans for the project site have the potential to facilitate population
growth and slightly increase demand on local parks. The General Plan outlines the importance of public recreation. The
project does not currently propose the development of public parks; however, future population growth induced by
future residential development would be supported by current facilities. The project would be subject to required
developer impact fees (Quimby fees) established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new
development. Therefore, project impacts on parks would be less than significant.
Other public facilities: The project would not induce substantial population growth and would result in a negligible
effect on use of other public facilities, such as roadways and public libraries. The project would be subject to the City’s
standard development fees, which would offset the project’s marginal contribution to increased use of City facilities.
Therefore, potential project impacts on public facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Page 292 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 53 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
The project site has the potential to induce future population growth of a maximum of 23 residential lots, which would be
developed with residential units, consistent with the General Plan. There would not be substantial population growth and City
development fees would offset the increased demand on any necessary public services. Therefore, project impacts on public
services would be less than significant.
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?
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
48, 49 ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Evaluation
Existing City recreational facilities consist of 28 parks and recreational facilities, 10 designated natural resources and open space
areas, and two bike trails. The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan 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 ar eas:
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. Parks and Recreation Element Policy 3.13.1
establishes the City’s goal to develop and maintain a park system at the rate of 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, 5 acres
of which shall be dedicated as neighborhood parks.
The Patricia Drive entrance to the Bishop Peak Trailhead is located approximately 0.5 mile northwest and Throop Park
is 0.4 mile south of the project site. Future plans for the project site have the potential to facilitate population growth
and increase demand on local parks. As discussed above, the project would be subject to required development impact
fees established to address direct demand for new facilities associated with new development. Therefore, project impacts
on parks would be less than significant.
The project does not propose the development of recreational facilities, and possible future development includes
residential development on the 23 residential lots, which would not require the construction or expansion of existing
recreational facilities. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Page 293 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 54 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The project site has the potential to induce future population growth of a maximum 23 residential lots, which would be developed
with residential units, consistent with the General Plan. There would not be substantial population growth and City development
fees would offset the increased demand on any necessary recreational facilities. Therefore, project impacts on recreation would
be less than significant.
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, 15,
21, 50 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
1,
50, 55 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 50 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1, 50,
54 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
The City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element identifies current traffic levels and delays on public roadways,
as well as transportation goals and policies to guide development and express the community’s preferences for current and future
conditions. Goals included in the plan include, but are not limited to, maintaining accessibility and protecting the environment
throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles; reducing use of cars by
supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and 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.
Level of Service (LOS) is a term used to describe the operating conditions of an intersection or roadway based on factors such
as speed, travel time, queuing time, and safety. LOS designations range between A and F, with A representing the best operating
conditions and F the worst. The Circulation Element establishes the minimum acceptable LOS standard for vehicles in the city
as LOS D (except in downtown areas).
The City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan outlines the City’s official policies for the design and development of
infrastructure to support sustainable transportation within the city and in adjoining territory under County of San Luis Obispo
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.” SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new metrics for
identifying and mitigating transportation impacts under 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 VMT per capita, VMT per employee, and net VMT as new metrics for transportation
analysis under CEQA (as detailed in State CEQA Guidelines 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 Auth ority
(SLORTA) operates transit service throughout San Luis Obispo County and adjacent areas. The project site is located off
Page 294 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 55 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Westmont Avenue from the east and Stanford Drive to the southwest. The project site is approximately 0.08 mile west of Santa
Rosa Street between Foothill Boulevard and the northern City limits. The nearest bus stop is located 0.2 mile away at Highland
Drive and Cuesta Drive. Additional bus stops are located 0.5 mile south along Foothill Boulevard.
In June 2020, the City formally adopted the transition from LOS to VMT for the purposes of CEQA evaluation and also
established local VMT thresholds of significance. Potential CEQA impacts are based on the VMT analysis.
The project site is accessed by Westmont Avenue and Stanford Drive, which are residential streets, and vehicular trips
on these streets are generated by residents.
The proposed project would be consistent with the City’s Circulation Element, which establishes goals and policies for
the City’s circulation system, described in the evaluation above. Future development would have access to several
transit stops less than 0.5 mile away. The project proposes a new 17-foot-wide AC bicycle/pedestrian easement to
promote alternative modes of transportation to and from the site. The proposed project is located approximately
0.56 mile north of dining, grocery, and other commercial buildings that could be reached using alternate modes of
transportation. New development would be consistent with goals and policies described in the City’s Circulation
Element and impacts would be less than significant.
The 2018 OPR SB 743 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA states that absent substantial
evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a
Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day
generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. According to the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, a single-family residential unit generates
9.44 average daily trips (ADT). The project would create 23 new parcels that could result in the development of single-
family residential uses, with an ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses. Operation of the project may create more
than 110 trips per day; however, based on the City’s Residential VMT Screening Map, the project is located in an area
of the city that would result in average VMT less than or equal to 85% of the regional average, meaning a project in
this area would result in VMT generation below the City’s adopted thresholds. Therefore, future potential development
of the project is not anticipated to generate VMT at a rate that is inconsistent with adopted plans and impacts would be
less than significant.
The project proposes the improvements that include a new 54- to 60-foot-wide interior road, emergency access, and
various easements, including a bicycle/pedestrian easement. These potential roadway improvements would be designed
and constructed in compliance with City Public Works Department standards to provide adequate vehicle and
emergency vehicle access to all proposed parcels. The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature or incompatible uses or result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, project impacts
would be less than significant.
As mentioned above, the project proposes the implementation of emergency vehicle access that would be with City
Public Works Department standards. The emergency access easement is a proposed improvement as part of the parcel
subdivision and would be completed prior to any potential residential development. Therefore, there would be adequate
access for emergency services and project impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Conclusion
Potential future infill development of residential uses at the project site would not result in a reduction in LOS on surrounding
intersections and would be consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) regarding VMT. Any future development
at the project site would be required to meet City Public Works Department safety design standards and would maintain adequate
emergency access. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts related to transportation would occur, and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
Page 295 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 56 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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)?
17, 18,
19, 59 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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.
17, 18,
19, 59 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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 subdivision (k) of California PRC Section
5020.1.
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 subdivision (c) of California PRC Section 5024.1. 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. The City has
provided notice of the opportunity to consult with appropriate tribes per the requirements of AB 52 and received correspondence
from Patti Dunton, Tribal Administrator of the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and San Benito Counties. The
correspondence included a request to have all ground disturbing activities for the project monitored by a cultural resource
specialist from their tribe. No other responses from California Native American tribes have been received as of the date of this
document.
a.i, ii.) As discussed in the evaluation above, the City received one response from the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo,
Monterey, and San Benito Counties in accordance with AB 52. The tribe requested that a cultural resource specialist
from their tribe monitor all ground disturbing activities approved with the project. The request for onsite monitoring has
been included as a mitigation measure with the project as TC-1. No additional consultation was requested from the
Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and San Benito Counties beyond this request. There have been no other
responses from Native American tribes in accordance with AB 52 as of the date of this draft. Therefore, impacts
associated with tribal resources would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 296 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 57 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been identified to address the potential for inadvertent discovery of cultural
resources and require cultural resource awareness training and cessation of work area if a discovery is made until a
qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find. Therefore, impacts related to a substantial adverse change
in the significance of tribal cultural resource would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan Tribe shall be notified prior to
any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered during subsurface
earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall be notified
immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Implement Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1,CR-2, and TC-1, 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 ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
a) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
39, 51 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) 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?
47, 60 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) 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?
52, 53 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 52, 53 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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’s Water Resource Recovery Facility
(WRRF) treats all wastewater from the city, Cal Poly, and the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, which includes
4.5 million gallons of wastewater per day. The WRRF manages and treats wastewater in accordance with standards established
by the SWRCB to remove solids, reduce the amount of nutrients, and eliminate bacteria in treated wastewater. A portion of the
treated water is recycled for irrigation use within the city and the remaining flow is discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek.
Page 297 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 58 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
The City utilizes San Luis Garbage as a licensed waste hauler for residential and commercial solid waste removal. Solid waste
collected from the city is taken to Cold Canyon Landfill, which is a modern municipal solid waste disposal facility that is
permitted by California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery (CalRecycle) and meets state and local rules and
regulations. The landfill disposes of non-hazardous solid waste.
For water needs, parcel improvements propose connecting to the existing water line on Stanford Drive and looping it
around to Cuesta Drive and a connection from Westmont Avenue will connect to Cuesta Drive through a proposed
17 foot-wide- easement of Lot 15. For sewer needs, parcel improvements propose connecting to the existing sewerline
on Stanford Drive and also proposes an additional line connecting to Cuesta Drive. Lots 17 and 18 would use the
existing sewer main on Westmont Avenue. The project proposes easements throughout the project site for additional
utility connections and relocation of existing ones. Parcel improvements propose PG&E easements for electricity needs.
Proposed drainage easements would occur across Lots 4, 15, and 19–23. Proposed drainage measures for the project
include an 85th percentile retention area, a 95th percentile retention area, and Filterra and Biofiltration treatment system
to capture surface runoff produced during project operation. Future development would require individual connections
to the proposed utility lines.
These new utility components and associated easements would have the potential to result in noise and dust emissions
in proximity to sensitive receptor locations, such as single-family residences. There would also be the potential for
discovery of subsurface cultural resources during proposed utility work. Excavation and other ground-disturbing
activity has the potential to release erosive or pollutant runoff to the onsite creek and associated wetland area. Mitigation
Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and TC_1 would reduce
potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from installation and establishment of new utility connections
associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and noise, respectively, to less than significant.
Therefore, potential environmental impacts associated with construction or extension of existing utilities would be less
than significant with mitigation.
The project would be serviced by the City’s water system, which has four primary water sources, including the Whale
Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento Reservoir, and recycled water (for irrigation), with groundwater serving
as a fifth supplemental source. As of 2015, the City no longer draws groundwater for potable purposes. 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 and Whale Rock Reservoirs are above 85% storage capacity and Nacimiento
Reservoir is at 45% storage capacity.
San Luis Obispo is located within the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin. The SGMA requires that high- and
medium-priority basins comply with the new law; the DWR designated the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin
as a high-priority basin. The City has developed a Groundwater Sustainability Plan to comply with SGMA regulations.
The COSE states the urban water planning and usage will use the “most efficient available practices” for water
conservation. The “most efficient available practices” refer to behavior and devices that use the least water for a desired
outcome, considering available equipment, lifecycle costs, social and environmental side effects, and the regulations of
other agencies.
Based on the 2020 Water Resources Status Report, the City utilizes multiple water sources to meet its water supply
needs. The four primary water sources for the City includes Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento
Reservoir, and recycled water; groundwater acts as the City’s fifth supplemental source. The total water available for
the City in 2020 was 10,107 AFY. As this availability was adjusted following years of drought and updates to the City’s
safe annual yield model, the availability is considered a reasonable long-term safe yield value for the purposes of this
analysis. The 2020 Water Year (October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020) had a total water demand of 4,730 AF with
0% of water being supplied by groundwater resources. Compared against the City’s 2020 annual availability, the City
has approximately 5,377 AF of water surplus available to allocate to new beneficial uses within the city.
The project would be required to pay development impact fees to offset the project’s marginal impact on the City’s
water resources. Future residential development will be conditioned to comply with City standards, and potential
impacts would be less than significant.
The proposed project would create new parcels that range from 6,000 to 24,000 sf each. According to the City’s
Wastewater Generation Rates per Use Table, residential units have to potential to generate 45 to 150 gallons of
Page 298 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 59 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
wastewater per day based on size of the dwelling unit. Specific development plans have not been identified; however,
there is potential for up to 23 new single-family residential units, with ADUs and JADUs as potential accessory uses,
to result from the proposed project. According to the City’s wastewater generation rates, a typical single-family
residence would generate approximately 150 gallons of wastewater per day and an ADU would generate approximately
105 gallons of wastewater per day. (JADUs are connected to single-family residences and are included with that rate.)
The project has the potential to generate approximately 5,865 gallons of wastewater per day. The City treats about 4.5
million gallons of wastewater per day according to standards set forth by the SWRCB. The WRRF operates in an
efficient manner to comply with federal, State, and local discharge requirements. This additional wastewater generation
would not result in a significant load on the City’s sewer infrastructure or the WRRF. Additionally, impact fees are
collected at the time building permits are issued to accommodate the project’s contribution to the City’s WRRF capacity.
Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Grading and other ground-disturbing activity has the potential to temporarily increase solid waste generation. Soil and
other waste that results from ground-disturbing activity would be disposed of according to applicable standards and
would not lead to the generation of excessive waste.
The proposed project has the potential to create up to 23 new single-family residential units, with ADUs and JADUs as
potential accessory uses, that would produce solid waste. According to the CalRecycle Estimated Solid Waste
Generation Rates Table, residential units generate approximately 12.23 pounds of solid waste per day. CalRecycle does
not include specific rates for ADUs; however, it can be assumed that based on the size of ADUs as compared to single-
family residential units, that ADUs produce solid waste at rates more similar to multi-family dwellings, which produce
approximately 4 pounds per day. (JADUs are connected to single-family residences and are included with that rate.)
Therefore, the project would produce approximately 373.29 pounds of solid waste per day. Future residential
development would include provision of solid waste and recycling receptacles that would be serviced by San Luis
Garbage and brought to Cold Canyon Landfill, which has approximately 13,100,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity
as of February 2020 and is expected to reach capacity in 2040. Cold Canyon Landfill is compliant with State and local
rules and regulations regarding solid waste and potential future residential development would be required to adhere to
the standards set forth in the City’s Development Standards for Solid Waste Services for trash, green waste, and
recycling. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Solid waste is disposed of at Cold Canyon Landfill, which follows State and local rules and regulations regarding solid
waste. The potential future residential development would be required to adhere to the standards set forth in the City’s
Development Standards for Solid Waste Services for trash, green waste, and recycling. Therefore, the impacts would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and TC-1.
Conclusion
With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5, BIO-1 through BIO-9, CR-1 and CR-2, N-1 and N-2, and
TC-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? 25, 54 ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Page 299 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 60 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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, 25,
54, 56,
57
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Evaluation
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 firefighters. 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 1 mile of a designated high or very high fire hazard severity zone,
which indicates significant risk to wildland fire.
The Safety Element identifies four policies to address the potential hazards associated with wildfire, including 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.
According to the City’s Safety Element Maps, the project is located within a low fire hazard severity zone. The project site is
surrounded by developed residential areas to the east, north, west, and south that are also designated as a low fire hazard severity
zone. The area of land located to the east north of the project is designated as a moderate fire hazard severity zone and Bishop
Peak located 0.5-mile northwest is designated as a high fire hazard severity zone. In addition, the project site is not located within
a State Responsibility Area (SRA).
The project proposes infill development within an existing residential neighborhood. 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.
The Safety Element describes the project area and immediate land as low and moderate wildland fire risk. The nearest
high wildland fire risk is located 0.5 mile northwest at Bishop Peak. Fire response times are less than 5 minutes for this
project location and City Fire Station #2 is located approximately 0.56 mile south of the project site. The General Plan
states that development shall only be approved when adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available or
will be made concurrent with development. Parcel upgrades include emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary
utility connections.
San Luis Obispo has an average wind speed of approximately 7 miles per hour. The project site is located on land that
is characterized as gently sloping and would not increase fire risk due to hazardous slopes onsite. Parcel improvements
propose to remove multiple ornamental trees and vegetation from the project site that would reduce wildfire hazard.
Future residential structures built on the upgraded parcels would be conditioned to comply with building and fire code
regulations as well as City requirements for fire safety.
In order to manage wildfire risk associated with placing residents in close proximity to moderate and high fire hazard
severity areas, a Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan for the project site has been identified in Mitigation Measure WF-1.
Additionally, a Wildland Fire Protection Report by James A. Neumann identifies mitigation measures to further reduce
wildland fire hazards to future development and is described in Mitigation Measure WF-2. Therefore, with
Page 300 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 61 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
implementation of Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2, impacts would be considered less than significant with
mitigation.
The proposed improvements to the project site include a new emergency access road, road upgrades, and necessary
utility connections. Additionally, future residential developments would also be required to comply with CBC
regulations for fire safety and to reduce fire risk. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The project area is not located within an area with substantial risk for flooding or landslides. Improvements made to the
project site for the proposed subdivision and future development of residential structures will be required to comply
with CBC regulations for fire safety and stability. The project does not include any design elements that would expose
people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the applicant shall provide a
vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot.
The plan shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase
defensible space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate
standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the following fire reduction methods
identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report (Neumann) to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which becomes a receptive fuel
bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials. Rain
gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences and decks in the
subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in the back yards of the
subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek, riparian area, to reduce the fuel
load.
7. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in height all around the northern
perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue to the 20-
foot setback at the west side of the creek, and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback at the east
side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of this wall is to
interrupt fire progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing the very desirable view
of the open space.
Conclusion
The project is located 0.5 mile away from a high wildland fire hazard zone and could expose people or structures to new or
exacerbated wildfire risks. The development of new and/or expanded infrastructure and maintenance to reduce wildfire risks is
proposed along with parcel improvements to the project site. Mitigation Measures WF-1 and WF-2 would reduce wildland fire
risk. Therefore, potential impacts associated with wildfire would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 301 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 62 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project would allow for the future development of up to 23 new residential units with ADUs and JADUs as accessory uses
within the project site and would result in the removal of several trees. Mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-7 identified in
Section 4, Biological Resources, are included to minimize potential impacts to native plants and wildlife species during project
construction. Specifically, Mitigation Measure BIO-8 through BIO-11 would reduce impacts to aquatic resources onsite.
Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 have been included to require awareness training be conducted for all construction crew
members so that cultural resources can be recognized if unearthed during site disturbance activities and to require work be halted
in the event of an unanticipated discovery until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find and identify the
appropriate protocol for properly responding to the inadvertent discovery. TC-1 requires a native American monitor to be present
during ground disturbance to identify unknown tribal cultural resources. 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)?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
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 incorporated into the project 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.
Page 302 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 63 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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?
N/A ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
The project has the potential to result in significant impacts associated with air quality and noise that could result in sub stantial
adverse effects on human beings. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 and N-1 and N-2 have been identified to reduce
these potential impacts to less than significant, including, but not limited to, standard idling restrictions, dust control measures,
preparation of a geologic investigation for asbestos, and implementation of noise control measures. With implementation of the
mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study, potential environmental effects of the project would not directly or indirectly
result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings, and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.
Page 303 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 64 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
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. Project Plans, Parcel Map, September 2020
2. Project Plans, Project Description, April 2020
3. City of San Luis Obispo Interactive Parcel Viewer, January 2015
4. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC (KMA), 468 Westmont Avenue, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
(Assessor’s Parcel Number 052-496-001) Biological Resources Assessment, August 2020
5. City of San Luis Obispo Conservation & Open Space Element (COSE), 2006.
6. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), California Scenic Highways, February 2017
7. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010
8. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, May 2019
9. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 2018
10. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Land Conservation Act of 1965: San Luis Obispo County, 2006
11. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD), County Attainment Status, 2019
12. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 2012
(revised November 2017)
13. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) Clean Air Plan, December 2001
Page 304 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 65 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
14. San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) Naturally Occurring Asbestos Mapping Tool,
2020
15. City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan, 2021
16. San Luis Obispo Heritage Trees Map, 2019
17. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory Map, 2019
18. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Natural Community Conservation Plans Map 2019
19. Historic Properties in San Luis Obispo, California (A SLO Story Map), accessed January 2021
20. San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Program Guidelines 2010
21. San Luis Obispo Transit 2019-20120 User Guide, June 17, 2019
22. City of San Luis Obispo Climate Action Plan, August 2020
23. California Building Code, 2019
24. California Department of Conservation (CDOC) Fault Activity Map of California, 2010
25. City of San Luis Obispo Safety Element, 2014
26. U.S., Geological Survey (USGS) Areas of Land Subsidence in California, Accessed January 2021
27. U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, 2019
28. California Department of Conservation (DOC), Soil Web Survey 2020
29. Geologic Map of the San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, San Luis Obispo County, California, 2004
30. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Envirostor Accessed January 2021
31. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Geotracker Accessed January 2021
32. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), Cortese List Data Resources Accessed January 2021
33. San Luis Obispo 2016 Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Update 2019
34. SLO Watershed Project, San Luis Obispo Creek Description, 2014
35. SLO Stormwater Website 2020
36. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) Viewer, accessed January
2021
37. California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Groundwater
Management, Webpage, 2019
38. County of San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin, Webpage, 2019
Page 305 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 66 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
39. City of San Luis Obispo 2019 Water Resources Status Report. August 2019.
40. California Department of Conservation (DOC) Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Port San Luis
Quadrangle, 2009
41. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin, 2019
42. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use Element 2014
43. City of San Luis Obispo Noise Element, 1996
44. Construction Noise Handbook: Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges, Federal Highway Administration,
September 2017
45. 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>.
46. City of San Luis Obispo 2014–2019 General Plan Housing Element, January 2015
47. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Annual Report, 2020
48. City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department Development Impact Fees, 2018
49. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan Parks and Recreation Element, 2001
50. City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element, October 2017
51. City of San Luis Obispo 2020 Water Resources Status Report, 2020
52. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates, California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery
(CalRecycle), accessed November 2019
53. SWIS Facility Detail Cold Canyon Landfill, Inc., California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle), Accessed August, 2020
54. San Luis Obispo Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2006
55. San Luis Obispo Residential VMT Screening Map. 2020
56. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps, San Luis
Obispo County, March 2009
57. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. 15.04. Construction and Fire Prevention Regulations. 2019
58. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), SB 743 Technical Advisory, April 2018
59. Joslin, Terry; Central Coast Archaeological Research Consultants (CCARC), Cultural Resources Survey of the
Westmont Avenue Project, City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, February 2020
60. City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater Generation Rates Per Use Table. Available at:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/utilities-department/wastewater/wastewater-offset-
program.
Page 306 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 67 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
61. City of San Luis Obispo Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. June 2020.
62. SWCA 2021 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report. January 2021.
63. USFWS Designation of Critical Habitat for the California red-legged frog Background, Questions and Answers.
March 16, 2010.
64. Kevin Merk Associates, LLC Memorandum Re: Westmont Avenue TTM 3157 – Response to Comments Regarding
Biological Resources. July 1, 2021.
65. Cannon, Drainage Report, Tract 3157, 468 Westmont Avenue, March 11, 2020
Attachments
1. Project Location Map
2. Proposed Project Plans
3. Biological Report
4. Response to Comments Regarding Biological Resources. July 1, 2021.
5. Drainage Report, Tract 3157, 468 Westmont Avenue, March 11, 2020
Page 307 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 68 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
Air Quality
AQ-1 Idling Control Techniques. During all construction activities and use of diesel vehicles, the applicant shall
implement the following idling control techniques:
1. Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors for Both On- and Off-Road Equipment.
a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors if
feasible;
b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted;
c. Use of alternative-fueled equipment shall be used whenever possible; and
d. Signs that specify the no idling requirements shall be posted and enforced at the construction
site.
2. California Diesel Idling Regulations. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with 13 CCR 2485. 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:
a. 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
b. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air
conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper
berth for greater than 5 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of a restricted area,
except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation.
Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers of the 5-minute idling limit.
The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulation can be reviewed at the following website:
www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/2485.pdf.
AQ-2 Particulate Matter Control Measures. During all construction and ground-disturbing activities, the applicant
shall implement the following particulate matter control measures and detail each measure on the project grading
and building plans:
1. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible.
2. Use of water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving
the site and from exceeding the SLOAPCD’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 miles
per hour (mph). Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
3. All dirt stockpile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as
needed.
4. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans
shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil-disturbing activities.
5. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than 1 month after initial grading shall
be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established.
6. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil
binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the SLOAPCD.
7. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition,
building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
Page 308 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 69 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
8. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any unpaved surface at the
construction site.
9. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or shall maintain at least
2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with
California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114.
10. “Track out” is defined as sand or soil that adheres to and/or agglomerates on the exterior surfaces of
motor vehicles and/or equipment (including tires) that may then fall onto any highway or street as
described in CVC Section 23113 and California Water Code (CWC) Section 13304. To prevent track
out, designate access points and require all employees, subcontractors, and others to use them. Install
and operate a “track-out prevention device” where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved
streets. The track-out prevention device can be any device or combination of devices that are effective
at preventing track out, located at the point of intersection of an unpaved area and a paved road. Rumble
strips or steel plate devices need periodic cleaning to be effective. If paved roadways accumulate tracked-
out soils, the track-out prevention device may need to be modified.
11. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water
sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping
when feasible.
12. All PM10 mitigation measures required should be shown on grading and building plans.
13. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons whose responsibility is to ensure any
fugitive dust emissions do not result in a nuisance and to enhance the implementation of the mitigation
measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints and reduce visible emissions below the SLOAPCD’s
limit of 20% opacity for greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include
holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress (for example, wind-blown dust could
be generated on an open dirt lot). The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to
the SLOAPCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition (Contact
Tim Fuhs at 805-781-5912).
AQ-3 Geologic Evaluation. Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain a registered
geologist to conduct a geologic evaluation of the property, including sampling and testing for NOA in full
compliance with SLOAPCD requirements and the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105). This geologic evaluation shall be submitted to the City Community
Development Department upon completion. If the geologic evaluation determines that the project would not have
the potential to disturb NOA, the applicant must file an Asbestos ATCM exemption request with the SLOAPCD.
AQ-4 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Control Measures. If NOA are determined to be present onsite, proposed
earthwork, demolition, and construction activities shall be conducted in full compliance with the various
regulatory jurisdictions regarding NOA, including the CARB ATCM for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR 93105) and requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 61, Subpart M – Asbestos).
These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the SLOAPCD;
2. Preparation of an asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant; and
3. Implementation of applicable removal and disposal protocol and requirements for identified NOA.
AQ-5 Asbestos-Containing Material. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the applicant shall provide an asbestos
report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. If ACM are determined to be present, at least 10
working days prior to any demolition work the applicant shall provide notification to SLOAPCD of such work.
The notification shall include an asbestos report that was prepared by a certified asbestos consultant. ACM
removal and disposal shall follow the requirements of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Regulation (NESHAP) Subpart M and of the SLOAPCD.
Page 309 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 70 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated onto Final Map and project grading / 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 SLOAPCD, as necessary.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Implement a Rare Plant Mitigation Program that ensures no net loss of Cambria morning glory on the
project site. Prior to any tract improvements, a Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall be implemented for Cambria
morning glory and shall be overseen by a qualified botanist approved by the City. As a component of the program,
seed shall be collected from Cambria morning glory plants during the appropriate season prior to tract grading
activities. Using standard procedures, the qualified botanist shall clean and store the seeds until the receiving sites
shown on the project plans are ready. Suitable habitat of 2,180 square-feet in size outside of the development area
(as designated on the site plans in the creek setback zone) shall be designated as the mitigation site that will be
maintained in a natural state and not be subject to mowing earlier than June 1 each year. The areas will be
maintained as grassland habitat and no planting of ornamental species or other adverse modifications (such as
grazing activities) will be allowed. The mitigation site shown on the project plans is twice the size as the areas
currently occupied by the rare plant occurrences (2,180 square-feet of habitat created for 1,076 square-feet of
habitat impacted). This equates to a 2:1 mitigation ratio (habitat created to habitat impacted) to ensure a minimum
1:1 replacement ratio is achieved. Topsoil from each of the four occurrences will be collected in 6-inch lifts and
stored for top-dressing the mitigation site once grading of the pads is complete. As needed, the mitigation site
should be prepared for planting by removal of non-native species or other measures as necessary, then applying
the salvaged topsoil. Once topsoil has been layered evenly through the area, collected seed should be hand-
broadcasted into suitable locations by the qualified botanist and covered with compost. Seed may also be
incorporated into the native erosion control seed mix described in the Native Erosion Control Seed Mix table
under Mitigation Measure BIO-9 and applied to other grassy areas of the site as part of the erosion control effort.
Depending on the season when construction starts, the qualified botanist may also potentially salvage plants (i.e.,
dig them up when soils are moist) and transplant them to containers to be maintained until the mitigation sites are
ready for planting.
BIO-2 Conduct annual monitoring and implement adaptive management measures for 5 years to ensure no net
loss of Cambria morning glory onsite. The Rare Plant Mitigation Program shall include annual monitoring and
maintenance of the mitigation site to ensure success of the program. Monitoring by a qualified botanist shall occur
during the spring growing season (between April 15 and May 15 each year) to ensure successful establishment of
planted propagules. The established rare plants shall be mapped to evaluate the goal of no net loss of the species
onsite. The measurable objective shall be to have at least 1,076 sf of occurrence comprised of approximately 300
Cambria morning glory plants. Appropriate vegetation sampling techniques shall be used to assess the areal cover
of vegetation to evaluate the status of the established occurrences. If the success criteria of having approximately
300 plants covering 1,076 sf within the creek setback zone is not reached by the third year of monitoring, remedial
actions such as collecting more seed and distributing it in suitable areas should be employed, with a corresponding
additional year of monitoring. Other activities to increase the success of the rare plant mitigation effort could
include non-native plant species removal within the mitigation site to reduce competition, additional seed
application, or supplemental irrigation during periods of prolonged drought. The qualified botanist shall prepare
annual reports for the applicant detailing the methods and results of the mitigation effort and monitoring effort.
The applicant shall be responsible for submitting the report to the City on an annual basis (by December 31 of
each year) for the 5-year monitoring period or until the final success criteria described above are met.
BIO-3 To the extent feasible, avoid initial site grading in the winter months. The burrowing owl has been recorded
in the vicinity of the project from October to the end of April. If initial vegetation removal and site grading for
the tract improvements is conducted outside of this period, potential effects on this species would be avoided and
no further mitigation would be required. Restricting the time period for earth-moving activities is also required to
avoid or minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation (see Mitigation Measure BIO-9). If initial grading
work must commence during the time period that burrowing owls may be present onsite, preconstruction surveys
for this species shall be included in the survey effort described in Mitigation Measure BIO-4 prior to vegetation
removal or tract improvements.
Page 310 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 71 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
BIO-4 Conduct a preconstruction survey and avoid construction in areas occupied by special-status wildlife
species until relocated or they have left the site. Within 7 days prior to the start of vegetation/tree removal,
ground-disturbing activities, or demolition of existing structures, a biologist approved by the City shall survey
the project impact area to identify whether nesting birds, roosting bats, monarch butterfly overwintering
populations, obscure bumble bee, and/or California legless lizard are present on site. A separate survey shall be
conducted for any phase of the project not conducted concurrently or within 10 days of cessation of the previous
phase (i.e., structure demolition conducted prior to general site grading). The biologist shall use appropriate
survey techniques for the special-status species identified in the 2020 BRA as having potential to occur onsite.
For example, burrows shall be examined with binoculars or wildlife cameras, and inspected for whitewash or
prey remains. Leaf litter and cover objects shall be searched for northern California legless lizards. Potential bat
roost sites shall be inspected for sign of roosting bats such as guano or prey remains. If any of these species are
found onsite, the biologist shall coordinate with the City, and CDFW as appropriate, on methods to ensure the
successful relocation of individuals to suitable habitat nearby. In some cases, CDFW may recommend creating
structures for displaced woodrats and bats. Burrowing owls can be discouraged from using burrows onsite, or
occupied burrows can be avoided until the owls have left the area. Bats can be restricted from roost sites by
placing netting over their entrances after they have left the roost for night-time foraging. The wildlife protection
measures to be employed will be based on the results of the survey and the particular characteristics of their use
of the site, in coordination with CDFW and the construction engineer. If no special-status animal species are
found onsite during the preconstruction survey, work may proceed with the implementation of the following
Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7.
BIO-5 Prepare and present a Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to any vegetation removal or tract
improvements, a qualified biologist shall prepare a Worker Environmental Awareness Program that will be
presented to all project personnel. This program shall detail measures to avoid and minimize impacts on biological
resources. It shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring on the project site and their
natural history, the status of the species and their protection under environmental laws and regulations, and the
penalties for take. Recommendations shall be given as to actions to avoid take should a special-status species be
found on the project site. Other aspects of the training shall include a description of general measures to protect
wildlife, including:
4. Delineation of the allowable work area, staging areas, access points, and limits to vehicle access;
5. Storage of all pipes, metal tubing, or similar materials stored or stacked on the project site for one or
more overnight periods shall be either securely capped before storage or thoroughly inspected for
wildlife before the materials are moved, buried, capped, or otherwise used.
6. Inspection of materials stored onsite, such as lumber, plywood, and rolls of silt fence, for wildlife that
may have sheltered under or within the materials;
7. Use of netting to exclude birds from nesting in construction materials;
8. Construction of escape ramps in all excavations and trenches more than 6 inches deep;
9. Contact information for the City-approved biologist and instructions should any wildlife species be
detected in the work site;
10. Dust suppression methods during construction activities when necessary to meet air quality standards
and protect biological resources; and
11. Methods for containment of food-related trash items (e.g., wrappers, cans, bottles, food scraps), small
construction debris (e.g., nails, bits of metal and plastic), and other human generated debris (e.g.,
cigarette butts) in animal-proof containers and removal from the site on a weekly basis.
All project personnel who have attended the training shall sign an attendance sheet. The program shall be repeated
for any new crews that arrive subsequently on the site.
BIO-6 Install high-visibility construction and silt fence along the creek corridor to delineate the allowable work
area, exclude wildlife from the site, and protect the stream habitat. Prior to vegetation removal or tract
improvements, and during subsequent residential development for Lots 1-7, a high-visibility construction fence
at least 4 feet tall together with a silt fence, or an approved wildlife exclusion fence, shall be erected along the
Page 311 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 72 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
creek corridor to delineate the limits of grading and vehicle access. If possible, the fence shall be erected along
the creek setback line, and encroachment into the setback shall be kept at a minimum. In no case shall ground
disturbance occur within the riparian habitat or below the top of bank without obtaining proper permits from
regulatory agencies. The type of fence used may be a combination of wildlife exclusion and silt fence (i.e., ERTEC
Triple-function E-fence) or similar materials that would serve the purposes of safety/construction area delineation,
wildlife exclusion, and siltation prevention. The fence shall be checked weekly by construction personnel for
needed maintenance.
BIO-7 Conduct biological monitoring for special-status wildlife species while the property is cleared and graded,
and structures are removed. A qualified biologist shall monitor the removal of structures, materials, and
vegetation that may provide cover for obscure bumble bee, northern California legless lizards, and bat roosting
sites. The biologist shall be onsite daily until all materials are removed and all vegetation has been cleared. If any
special-status species are found, work shall be delayed until the individuals have left the work area or CDFW
shall be notified to obtain authorization for capture and relocation.
BIO-8 Avoid vegetation removal within the riparian habitat during the overwintering season. Vegetation removal
within the riparian area shall be conducted outside of the overwintering season for monarch butterfly (late October
through February) and obscure bumble bee (late October through January) to avoid disturbance to species
potentially inhabiting riparian vegetation.
BIO-9 Install erosion and sediment BMPs and revegetate graded areas. The following erosion and sedimentation
control BMPs are required to be implemented during vegetation removal, tract improvements, during individual
lot construction, and after the construction phases of the project:
12. If possible, the potential for erosion and sedimentation shall be minimized by scheduling construction to
occur outside of the rainy season, which is typically defined as October 15 through April 15. Adherence
to this measure would also serve as avoidance for the burrowing owl, as described in Mitigation Measure
BIO-3.
13. To minimize site disturbance, all construction related equipment shall be restricted to established roads,
construction areas, and other designated staging areas. The creek setback zone shall be clearly marked
as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
14. Prior to any site disturbance during tract improvements or individual lot construction, a Sediment and
Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer. The use of silt fence, straw wattles,
erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags, fiber rolls, and other appropriate techniques should be
employed to protect the drainage features on and off the property. Biotechnical approaches using native
vegetation shall be used as feasible. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion
controls and other stormwater protection BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. All sediment and
erosion control measures shall be installed per the engineer’s requirements prior to the initiation of site
grading if planned to occur within the rainy season.
15. Spill kits shall be maintained on the site, and a Spill Response Plan shall be in place.
16. No vehicles or equipment shall be refueled within 100 feet of wetland areas, riparian habitat and/or
drainage features, and refueling areas shall have a spill containment system installed. No vehicles or
construction equipment shall be stored overnight within 100 feet of these areas unless drip pans or ground
covers are used. All equipment and vehicles shall be checked and maintained on a daily basis to ensure
proper operation and to avoid potential leaks or spills. Construction staging areas shall be located in a
location where spills would not drain into aquatic habitats.
17. No concrete washout shall be conducted on the site outside of an appropriate containment system.
Washing of equipment, tools, etc. should not be allowed in any location where the tainted water could
enter onsite drainages.
18. The use of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, or biocides shall be in compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other state and
federal legislation.
Page 312 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 73 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
19. All project-related spills of hazardous materials within or adjacent to the project site should be cleaned
up immediately.
20. All areas with soil disturbance shall have appropriate erosion controls and other stormwater protection
BMPs installed to prevent erosion potential. Silt fencing, erosion control blankets, straw bales, sandbags,
fiber rolls, and/or other types of materials prescribed on the plan shall be implemented to prevent erosion
and sedimentation. Biotechnical approaches using native vegetation shall be used as feasible.
21. Areas with disturbed soils shall be restored under the direction of the project engineer in consultation
with a qualified restoration ecologist as detailed above. Methods may include recontouring graded areas
to blend in with existing natural contours, covering the areas with salvaged topsoil containing native
seedbank from the site, and/or applying the native seed mix as described in the table below. Native seed
mix shall be applied to the graded areas in the creek setback area through either direct hand seeding or
hydroseeding methods. Seeding with the native erosion control seed mix should be provided on all
disturbed soil areas prior to the onset of the rainy season (by October 15).
Native Erosion Control Seed Mix
Species Application Rate
(lbs/acre)
California Brome (Bromus carinatus) 10
purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra) 5
tomcat clover (Trifolium wildenovii) 5
six weeks fescue (Vulpia microstachys) 5
Total 25
BIO-10 Obtain necessary permits for impacts in jurisdictional areas, implement a compensatory mitigation
program, and monitor the success of the program to ensure no net loss of Riparian/Wetland habitat or
other waters on the subject property. Prior to any vegetation removal or site disturbance within the areas
delineated as jurisdictional features (Figure 5, Aquatic Resources Delineation 2021), the applicant shall provide
documentation to the City that a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from USACE, a Clean Water Act Section
401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and a California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake and
Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW have been obtained or have been determined by the regulatory
agencies to not be required.
If regulatory permits are required, Prior to the initiation of vegetation removal or tract improvements, the applicant
shall retain a qualified biological monitor to ensure compliance with all Clean Water Act, , City of San Luis
Obispo stormwater and water quality requirements, and CDFW permit requirements during work adjacent to
the creek. The monitor shall be present during the installation of the construction fencing delineating the limits
of work in relation to the edge of riparian, creek top of bank, and 20-foot creek setback buffer, as described in
Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Since the Cambria morning glory compensatory mitigation site is to be located within
this buffer, the monitor shall direct appropriate wildlife exclusion and erosion control BMPs to protect riparian
habitat during site preparation for planting. The monitor shall be present during construction of the rip rap pad
and any other work within the creek setback area on stormwater structures. The monitor shall also oversee removal
of non-native tree species and site preparation for tree planting within the setback. If a Habitat Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan (HMMP) is required by the regulatory agencies, the applicant shall provide a copy of the plan to
the City and the biological monitor shall be responsible for successful implementation of the plan.
BIO-11 Record a Biological Easement and Biological Easement Agreement protecting riparian area: A Biological
Easement and Biological Easement Agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with the final map recordation.
The easement agreement shall be developed by the applicant in a format provided by the City. The following
activities are permitted within the biological easement, subject to the review and approval by the City
Sustainability and Natural Resources Official:
22. Stormwater improvements.
Page 313 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 74 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
23. Removal of non-native trees.
24. Restoration and creek bank stabilization activities.
No future paving or structures shall be permitted within the biological easement. Creek setback standards shall
be applied to the easement area, consistent with municipal code requirements.
Monitoring Program: These conditions and measures shall be noted on Final Map and all grading and construction plans.
The City Community Development Department and Natural Resources Manager shall verify compliance.
Cultural Resources
CR-1 Discovery of Previously Unidentified Cultural Resources. In the event that historical or archaeological remains
are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall
be issued, and the City 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. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s
final map and all improvement/construction plans.
CR-2 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains are exposed during ground-disturbing activities
associated with the project, an immediate halt work order shall be issued, and the City Community Development
Director shall be notified. California 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 PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. These requirements shall be noted on the project’s final map and all
improvement/construction plans.
Monitoring Program: These conditions shall be noted on Final Map and 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 For the entire duration of the construction phase of the project, the following BMPs shall be adhered to:
1. Stationary construction equipment that generates noise that exceeds 60 dBA at the project boundaries
shall be shielded with the most modern noise control devises (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor
enclosures).
2. Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, rock drills, etc.) used for project construction shall
be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed-
air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
3. Where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be
used.
4. All construction equipment shall have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement methods
installed, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration insulators, intact and operational.
5. All construction equipment shall undergo inspection at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance
and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers, shrouding, etc.).
N-2 Construction plans shall note construction hours, truck routes, and all construction noise BMP, and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading/building
permits. The City shall provide and post signs stating these restrictions at construction entry sites prior to
commencement of construction and maintained throughout the construction phase of the project. All construction
Page 314 of 359
ER # EID-0170-2020
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 75 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2021
workers shall be briefed at a preconstruction meeting on construction hour limitations and how, why, and where
BMP measures are to be implemented.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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. Tribal Cultural Resources
TC-1 Culturally Affiliated Native American Monitor. A representative from the Salinan Tribe shall be notified
prior to any ground disturbing activities to provide for on-site monitoring. If cultural resources are encountered
during subsurface earthwork activities, all ground disturbing activities within a 25-foot radius of the find shall
cease and the City shall be notified immediately consistent with the requirements of Mitigation Measures CR-1
and CR-2.
Monitoring Program: These measures shall be incorporated into Final Map and 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.
Wildfire
WF-1 Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the applicant shall provide a
vegetation/fuel management plan prepared by a registered professional forester or certified arborist for each lot.
The plan shall identify fuel load reduction techniques, including vegetation removal and trimming, to increase
defensible space around residential structures and driveways/access roads. The plan shall also identify appropriate
standards for installation of new landscaping, such as requirements for drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species.
WF-2 Additional Fire Hazard Reductions. Future development would incorporate the following fire reduction
methods identified by the 2020 Wildland Fire Protection Report (Neumann)to reduce wildland fire risk:
1. Rain gutters, when not adequately maintained, will collect leaf material which becomes a receptive fuel
bed for embers and sparks and can then transmit fire underneath the non-combustible roof materials.
Rain gutters should be protected by noncombustible leaf shields or not allowed.
2. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for only non-combustible fences and decks in the
subdivision.
3. Record on all lots a deed restriction that allows for fire resistant landscaping in the back yards of the
subdivision.
4. Require enclosed eves on all structures within the subdivision.
5. Install fireproof vents on all structures (fire-rated, flame and ember resistant).
6. Working with the biologist, remove the non-native vegetation in the creek, riparian area,
7. reduce the fuel load.
8. Install a non-combustible wall (block or steel stud /stucco) wall 36 inches in height all around the
northern perimeter of the subdivision. The wall shall begin at the westernmost property line and continue
to the 20-foot setback at the west side of the creek, and shall continue beginning at the 20-foot setback
at the east side of the creek, terminating at the property line of CAL FIRE Station #12. The purpose of
this wall is to interrupt fire progression from the north onto the proposed lots without obstructing the
very desirable view of the open space.
Monitoring Program: This measure shall be incorporated into Final Map and noted on all grading and construction plans.
The City Community Development Department shall verify compliance through initial and regular inspections.
Page 315 of 359
Page 316 of 359
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: REVIEW, CONTINUED FROM MAY 26, 2021, OF A TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP (TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE
WITHIN THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE. PROJECT INCLUDES THE
EXTENSION OF STANFORD DRIVE, WHICH WILL CONNECT TO AN EXTENSION OF
CUESTA DRIVE. AN INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS
PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION (CEQA).
PROJECT ADDRESS: 468/500 Westmont Ave. BY: Kyle Van Leeuwen,
Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7091
E-mail: kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: SBDV-0169-2020, FROM: Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
EID-0170-2020
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) recommending the City Council approve Tentative
Tract Map (TTM) No. 3157 and adopt the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) application to subdivide the
subject parcel into 23 residential lots. No residential development is proposed at this time;
however, recordation of the map would require the installation of public improvements,
including new roads, water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure (Attachment B,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan). This project was reviewed by Planning
Commission on May 26, 2021. The commission moved to continue the item to allow for
Applicant Andrew G. Meinhold,
Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust
Representative Katie Rollins, Cannon
Zoning Low-Density Residential (R-
1)
General Plan Low Density Residential
Site Area 4.98 acres
Environmental
Status
Initial Study-Mitigated
Negative Declaration
(IS/MND)
Meeting Date: 7/28/2021
Item Number: 4a
Time Estimate: 90 Minutes
Page 317 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 2
completion of the 30-day public comment period on the environmental document
prepared for the project and to allow for staff to incorporate additional information and
clarifications that address public comments regarding California red-legged frog,
burrowing owl, and other concerns about biological impacts. The commission also
directed staff to work with the applicant to review alternative grading concepts to further
preserve large trees, and to address concerns raised related to transportation and traffic
impacts (Attachment C, Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes).
At the hearing on May 26th, many neighbors stated that they did not receive a mailed
notice about the Planning Commission hearing. Since that hearing, staff discovered that
the notices intended to be sent for the May 26th hearing did not go out with the appropriate
batch and were received late. Due to the circumstances, review of this item is considered
a de novo hearing and will be presented as such with additional attention to those areas
highlighted at the previous hearing. This will also allow for those commissioners not
present at the May 26th hearing to participate.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
Review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations and
applicable City development standards and guidelines. Planning Commission (PC)
review is required for projects that include the subdivision of five or more lots (Subdivision
Regulations, Table 1). The PC’s role is to make a recommendation to the City Council on
the proposed subdivision and associated environmental document (Attachment D, Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration). This project is subject to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Accountability Act. 1
2.0 PROJECT STATISTICS AND SETTING
The project proposes 23 residential lots on a 4.98-acre site zoned for residential use (R-
1). The proposed lots are consistent with the Subdivision Regulations standards for lot
size and dimensions and the proposed streets and other improvements are consistent
with current engineering standards. No exceptions to the subdivision regulations have
been proposed. The project site has a creek that crosses the western portion of the site.
Lots have been proposed in an arrangement that allows for creek setbacks to be applied
to those lots adjacent to the creek and allow for an adequate buildable area outside those
applied setbacks.
1
A tentative tract map application to subdivide lots for residential use is a “housing development project” under the
HAA, and is therefore, afforded the protections set forth in California Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(1). (See
Honchariw v. County of Stanislaus (2011) 200 Cal. App. 4th 1066, 1074.)
Page 318 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 3
Figure 1: Subdivision Design
TABLE 1: SUBDIVISION: GROSS AND NET LOT SIZE
Lot Gross Lot Size
(sf)
Net Lot Size*
(sf)
Lot Gross Lot Size
(sf)
Net Lot Size*
(sf)
1 24,451 20,109 13 6,000 Same
2 11,283 9,265 14 6,000 Same
3 9,750 8,976 15 6,000 Same
4 7,884 6,598 16 6,000 Same
5 9,115 7,468 17 6,533 Same
6 10,097 7,931 18 6,001 Same
7 8,868 6,823 19 6,691 Same
8 6,374 Same 20 6,298 Same
9 6,000 Same 21 6,117 Same
10 6,000 Same 22 9,283 Same
11 6,000 Same
12 6,000 Same Minimum Req
Net
6,000
*Net lot size excludes areas between creek top of bank
2.1 SETTING
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1.
The 4.98-acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont
Avenue and the northern terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existing
development on the project site includes two residential structures and associated
accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements. Vegetation on the property
Page 319 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 4
includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian habitat that extends
through the western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of
developed/ruderal land, riparian habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental
and native trees throughout the project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits.
East: Single- and multi-family residences zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density
(R-2).
South: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
The project was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission (PC) on May 26, 2021;
however, as noted above, review of this item is considered a de novo hearing. At the May
26th hearing, the PC received presentations and testimony from staff, the applicant’s
team, and the public, and provided direction and comments to staff and the applicant. The
result of this hearing was a motion to continue the item to allow for the completion of the
30-day public comment period on the environmental document, and to allow for staff to
incorporate additional information and clarifications that address public comments
regarding wildlife and biological resources, to explore alternative grading concepts that
would allow for greater protection of large trees, and to address concerns raised related
to transportation impacts (discussed below).
The project was reviewed by the City’s Tree Committee on May 17, 2021, for consistency
with the Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee (TC) recommended that, with the
inclusion of the recommended condition of approval for compensatory planting, the PC
find the proposed tree removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations (Attachment
E, Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Minutes). The TC recommended that the
project approval include a condition to provide compensatory tree plantings at a one-to-
one ratio on site, consistent with Municipal Code requirements, and that compensatory
plantings consist of an even mix of 15-gallon and 24-inch tree box sizes. The
recommendation also stipulated that 50% of the required compensatory plantings be of a
native species. This condition has been included in the proposed resolution as Condition
#5. The TC also included in their motion a request that the Planning Commission consider
the retention of several specific trees onsite. This included one eucalyptus within the
creek corridor (#114), and two eucalyptus and one live oak near the southern edge of the
property line on proposed lots 23 (#s 33, 34, & 91).
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The project must conform to the standards and limitations of the Subdivision Regulations
and be consistent with the General Plan. Staff has evaluated the project and the PC shall
consider if the project is in substantial compliance with the applicable policies and
standards, as discussed in this analysis. The project aligns with the Major City Goal to
address Housing and Homelessness, as the project would facilitate the production of
housing; 23 lots for single-family residential development created from one existing
residential lot.
Page 320 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 5
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing
Element (HE) provide policies for the conservation and development of residential
neighborhoods. The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides
policies to preserve and protect natural resources on the project site. The project is
consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected
from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should
favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets
should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should include
measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles, textured
crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, bollards, and on-street
parking and sidewalks.
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas
with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote
neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each other
and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide
continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby community
facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting commercial
areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would
increase cut-through traffic.
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development
provide bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent
with City plans and development standards. When evaluating transportation
impacts, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks
and pedestrian paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards.
When evaluating transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of
Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and
bicycle linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent
neighborhoods, schools, parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic by
only connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut-through
traffic between other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision design also
incorporates a potential bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as
parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks.
Page 321 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 6
Figure 1: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new
residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where
physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new
neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the
street layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and
parkways (see Figure 2 as example).
Figure 2: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential
developments to preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such
as landforms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and
plants.
Page 322 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 7
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential
developments to respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground
slope, access, creeks and wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native
vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback B.: Development approvals should respect the
separation from creek banks and protection of floodways and natural features
identified in part A above (buildings, streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the
setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots
proposed adjacent to the creek are a larger size so that creek protection measures, such
as compliance with the applied creek setback requirements, can be met and still allow
development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes no development or grading
activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and associated vegetation
is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live oaks, will be retained within
the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native species.
Figure 3: Creek Corridor, trees number in black within setbacks are retained
4.2 Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets
specific development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R-1 zone is 6,000
square feet with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet. Lots are
also required to have a minimum street frontage of 20 feet. All the lots within the proposed
Page 323 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 8
subdivision meet these base requirements for size and dimension. Additionally, the
Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek banks shall be excluded from
the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also demonstrated compliance with
this requirement (See Table 1 above). The Subdivision Regulations also call for natural
contours of the site to be preserved to the greatest extent possible in new subdivisions
and for lot lines to be generally perpendicular to the street (§16.18). The design of the
subdivision is consistent with these standards.
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per Table
3 of the Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall have a
minimum area of 15% greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet wider that
otherwise required. Lot 19 does provide a width of no less than 60 feet, consistent with
this standard, but is less than 15% larger than the minimum lot area. Staff has included
in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the area of lot 19 to be increased
to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation, consistent with regulations
standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving the lot line between Lot 19 and
lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot 20’s compliance with minimum lot
size or dimension standards. Only minor changes in site grading will be needed with this
adjustment of lot lines.
5.0 ANALYSIS OF PC DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
The following analysis section concentrates on the specific areas identified by the PC at
the May 26th hearing.
5.1 Environmental Review
Prior to the May 26th hearing public comment was received regarding the biological
analysis incorporated into the Initial Study. Areas of concern were specific to the adequate
protection of the riparian and wildlife corridor, the California red-legged frog, and the
burrowing owl. In response to these comments, the applicant’s biologist and City’s
Sustainability and Natural Resource Officer re-visited the site on June 10th to further
evaluate the conditions of the site and adjacent creek areas, and the applicant’s biologist,
Kevin Merk, has provided a memorandum in response to those comments (Attachment
F). The conclusions of that analysis and additional staff analysis are provided below.
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been updated in certain areas as
needed in connection to the information below in response to public comments and
Planning Commission direction. These modifications do not require recirculation of the
IS/MND because the edits constitute minor modifications and clarifications to an adequate
MND and do not include significant new information that would result in a new significant
environmental impact or a substantial increase in the severity of a significant
environmental impact. Within the Initial Study document all new text is indicated by
underlined, bold, and italicized text. Deleted text is indicated by strike-through
(Attachment D). Additional information and discussion about certain areas of the
Environmental Review are provided in Attachment C.
Page 324 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 9
Riparian Corridor and Creek Protection
The project proposes to remove nonnative species from the riparian corridor and this
removal is recommended by the project's Fire Protection Plan (Attachment K) to reduce
fuel loads; this does not include the redwood trees in the corridor. The effects of these
actions and other measures within the creek corridor are described in the Biological
Resource Analysis and further discussed in the Memorandum, provided by Kevin Merk.
The conclusion of that analysis is that with the application of creek setbacks,
establishment of an open space easement, and the habitat enhancements proposed
(such as the removal on non-native species and replanting of native species), the habitat
value of this creek area will increase, and the wildlife corridor connecting areas to the
north and south will be maintained and enhanced.
Additional Information on Creek Protection
The section of Twin Ridge Creek located on the project site is not a creek subject to creek
setback requirements outlined in the General Plan and Zoning Regulations. While the
project plans identify a 20-foot setback from the riparian area, these 20-foot setbacks do
not reflect a current requirement for the site. The creek setback standards in the Zoning
Regulations (Section 17.70.030 (B)), state: creek setback requirements shall apply to all
creeks as defined in the General Plan Open Space Element and shown on that element’s
creek map, and only to those creeks. This section of Twin Ridge Creek is not identified
on the Conservation and Open Space Element2 (COSE) Creek Map and therefore, is not
currently subject to creek setback requirements.
The creek setbacks were shown on plans at the recommendation of staff and are intended
to show that a usable building envelope is provided on each lot adjacent to the creek, in
anticipation that the application of creek setbacks would likely be included as a mitigation
measure or tract condition. This also demonstrates that the lots were specifically designed
by the applicant to include appropriate creek protection, even if the Zoning Regulations
do not specifically require a 20-foot setback for the onsite creek. Creek protection is also
consistent with guidelines found in the Subdivision Regulations.3 The IS/MND includes
mitigation measure BIO-11, which requires the application of creek setback standards to
the sites adjacent to the creek. This means that creek setback requirements will be
applied to the newly created lots adjacent to the creek when structures are proposed,
even though this section of Twin Ridge Creek is not identified on the COSE creeks map.
Extent of Riparian Edge
During the recent review of the riparian corridor and associated analysis documents, a
discrepancy was identified in the method used to determine the extent of the creek’s
riparian area, and the extent of jurisdictional areas. The applicant’s initial delineation of
the creek’s riparian area did not include areas covered by non-native trees such as the
eucalyptus and acacia trees, and the delineation has been adjusted to include this
additional area in Attachment G (Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative Grading
Concept). This revised delineation is consistent with the City’s Creek Setback standards,
2 City of San Luis Obispo, Conservation and Open Space Element: Figure 9: Creeks and Wetlands:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/4110/635497639403930000
3 Subdivision Regulations, §16.18.155 (1): Creeks and their corridors are to be preserved as open space, and creek corridors are
to be maintained in essentially a natural state to protect the community’s water quality, wildlife diversity, and aesthetic value.
Page 325 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 10
which state that creek setbacks shall be measured from the existing top of bank or from
the edge of the predominant pattern of riparian vegetation, whichever is further from the
creek flow line (Section 17.70.030.C). While the City’s creek setback requirements do not
apply to this specific creek, as noted above, the language in the Zoning Regulations
explaining how the setback would be measured is a useful tool to use when determining
the extent of riparian area that should be protected.
In response to this discrepancy, and the direction from PC to explore the possibility of
retaining more trees on site (discussed further below), the applicant has provided an
additional exhibit showing the revised delineation in addition to an alternative grading
approach and new locations for storm water treatment/retention. These new grading and
retention locations would be outside this expanded riparian area and would allow for the
retention of the non-native species; however, as discussed further below, retaining these
non-native trees would conflict with the Fire Protection Measures that are recommended
to mitigate a potential wildfire impact. This change in delineation of the riparian corridor
to include non-native species does not result in a new significant impact or increase the
severity of an identified impact because the physical effects of the project on the
environment, including and not limited to proposed tree removals, was adequately
addressed in the Initial Study, and the clarifications that have been incorporated into the
Initial Study include evidence in support of the impact determinations. Mitigation requiring
compensatory plantings would be required.
California Red Legged Frog
In the Biological Resource Assessment provided by Kevin Merk, it was stated that
California red-legged frog (CRLF) was “unlikely” to occur on the project site based on lack
of suitable habitat and separation from known breeding sites to the north. Public
comments received by the City suggested that a “permanently wetted” branch of Twin
Ridge Creek downstream of the site may provide suitable habitat for CRLF. Upon further
review by Merk (Attachment F), the areas identified by the commenter are not suitable for
CRLF breeding due to the small size of pools and insufficient water depth and lack of
vegetation cover. Furthermore, while this creek is within a 116,517-acre area designated
as critical habitat for the CRLF, Twin Ridge Creek has not been identified as red-legged
frog habitat in the California Natural Diversity Database (Attachment H, Biological
Resource Assessment). Any currently identified breeding sites are separated from the
project site by a major barrier (Highway 1), leading to the conclusion that there is a very
low potential for CRLF to utilize the project site or adjacent wetted areas for breeding or
dispersal. In addition, required mitigation includes pre-construction surveys and biological
monitoring to ensure avoidance and protection of special-status species. Based on the
analysis in the IS/MND and supplemental evaluation (Attachment F), no additional studies
or mitigation measures are warranted.
Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owls are rare in the coastal San Luis Obispo area, and according to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife are believed to no longer nest in this region.
The project site is highly manipulated from years of human occupation, and the onsite
grassland areas are used regularly for horses and are mowed and managed. This species
is very sensitive to human activity and the proximity of the site to dense urban
Page 326 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 11
development in the city further reduces the habitat value for this species, especially
considering the extensive grasslands to the north along Highway 1 that are further away
from human activities. No Burrowing Owls were observed during field investigations. The
mitigation measures included with the IS/MND require a pre-construction survey and
provide protections in the case that a Burrowing Owl is discovered on site or in close
proximity. Based on this analysis no additional studies or mitigations are warranted.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Public comments received by the City stated that the project would result in substantial
erosion and increased discharge into the creek, and that the project would substantially
decrease groundwater recharge. While the project would increase the amount of
impervious surface, the project will be required to comply with the drainage requirements
of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of
ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways
Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that
site development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not
significantly exceed pre-development run-off.
The proposed drainage measures would be implemented to catch additional surface
runoff generated from the project during operation. As further described in the Drainage
Report (Attachment I), the proposed approach to peak flow management for this project
would result in an overall reduction in peak flow into Twin Ridge Creek. The proposed
approach to peak flow management includes collecting a portion of the runoff from the
proposed development, detaining that flow in a detention facility, and then introducing it
to Twin Ridge Creek. Other locations on site collect and detain runoff within an
underground detention facility and then released onto streets consistent with the current
drainage condition for the site.
The project is also required to comply with Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Requirements, including requirements for site design, water quality treatment, runoff
retention, and peak discharge management. These requirements include, and are not
limited to, minimizing impervious surfaces, collecting stormwater runoff to reduce
pollutant discharge, and maintaining the pre-developed hydrology by reducing overland
flow and promoting groundwater recharge. Therefore, based on compliance with existing
regulations and recommended mitigation measures, no significant hydrology and water
quality impacts would occur.
5.2 Tree Preservation
The Planning Commission directed staff and the project applicant to explore alternative
grading approaches to further preserve large trees currently on site that are identified for
removal (Attachment J, Tree Removal Exhibit). Staff discussed and evaluated with the
applicant possible modifications to site grading, and this analysis also took into
consideration how changes in proposed site grading would affect the project’s compliance
with Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards and other City codes and
standards. The overall conclusion of these evaluations was that greater tree protection in
most instances would require such changes in grading or site engineering that the project
would be brought out of compliance with applicable regulations and standards related to
Page 327 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 12
grading and site engineering. A summary of this evaluation and conflicts has been
provided by the applicant (Attachment G, Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative
Grading Concept). In addition, retention of the non-native trees would conflict with the
Fire Protection Report, which calls for non-native trees within the corridor to be removed.
The Subdivision Regulations call for the natural contours of a site to be largely preserved,
and storm water and drainage standards call for runoff to be retained and managed within
the site. Compliance with these requirements paired with the fact that large trees are often
located at low points of the site where water naturally collects, presents an unavoidable
conflict with the preservation of trees. For other larger trees not located in low lying areas,
engineering standards for street and driveway grades, and limits on retaining wall heights,
constrain how much the subdivision design can be modified to facilitate tree preservation
while maintaining compliance with those standards. While tree protection policies are
applicable to the project, a proposed subdivision must first and foremost be compliant
with the Subdivision Regulations and Engineering Standards. This project does not
include any exceptions to subdivision standards or engineering standards for streets and
driveways.
Trees within the Creek Corridor
The applicant has provided an additional exhibit showing how the project can be executed
while retaining the non-native trees within and directly adjacent to the riparian area, with
grading and stormwater treatment/retention areas moved outside of these areas. While
retention of the non-native trees in this area is possible as shown on the applicant’s
additional exhibit, staff notes that this would conflict with the Fire Protection Report, which
calls for non-native trees within the corridor to be removed. The City’s Fire Marshall
required a Fire Protection Report be provided for the project, and this report provides
effective ways to mitigate fire risk. The Fire Protection Report’s recommendations are
incorporated as mitigation measures for the project and would mitigate potential wildfire
impacts to a less than significant level.
In conjunction with the removal of non-native trees in the riparian area, mitigation
measure BIO-10 requires a compensatory mitigation program to ensure no net-loss of
riparian habitat. These replanting efforts will “fill in” some areas where non-native species
were removed and will become the new riparian edge. When development of specific lots
occurs, the setback will be measured from this edge. Staff recommends that the language
of condition #4 be modified from the previous resolution as follows:
Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the Biological Easement
required by mitigation measure BIO- 11. This easement shall include all the area
between the creek top of bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which
are planned directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the
centerline of the creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for
Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
This will ensure that compensatory planting areas intended to compensate for removal of
non-native species receive open space easement protections.
Page 328 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 13
5.3 Transportation and Traffic Concerns
Planning Commission directed staff to address concerns raised by neighboring residents
related to traffic impacts of the project. The evaluation of the project includes analysis of
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), consistency with the Circulation Element, potential
hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and emergency access.
This analysis concludes that there are no significant impacts related to transportation and
traffic. In evaluating the impacts of new streets and level of service, staff found that the
existing streets would become safer than the current condition with the extension of
Cuesta Drive connecting to an extension of Stanford Drive. While the extension of the two
streets would increase the number of vehicles utilizing them, approximately seven
additional homes using Stanford and nine using Cuesta, these new street connections
would also improve emergency access. Currently, these two streets do not terminate in
a cul-de-sac turnaround, which is an undesirable scenario. With the two streets
connected, residents in the area will have a second means of evacuation, and emergency
vehicle response is improved. For these reasons, staff does not recommend modifications
to the project’s current street design.
6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including
Planning, Engineering, Utilities, Fire, Building, Office of Sustainability, Natural Resources,
and the City Arborist. 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 Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that
cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan,
Subdivision Regulations, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents or make
findings required by the Housing Accountability Act (California Government Code
Section 65589.5(j)(1) that the project either results in a “specific, adverse impact”
and “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse
impact.”
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Resolution
B. Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan
C. Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes 5.26.21
D. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
E. Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes 5.17.21
F. Response to Comments Regarding Biological Resources, Kevin Merk Associates
G. Review of Preservation of Trees & Alternative Grading Concept, Cannon
H. Biological Resource Assessment
I. Drainage Report
J. Tree Removal Exhibit
K. Fire Protection Plan
Page 329 of 359
1
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2021, 6:00 p.m.
City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Planning
Commissioners
Present:
Chair Bob Jorgensen, Vice Chair Nick Quincey, Commissioner
Hemalata Dandekar, Commissioner Michael Hopkins,
Commissioner Steve Kahn, Commissioner Michelle Shoresman
Planning
Commissioners
Absent:
Commissioner Mike Wulkan
City Staff Present: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy
Community Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant City
Attorney Markie Jorgensen, Kevin Christian, Deputy City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to
order on July 28, 2021 at 6:01 p.m.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
3. CONSENT
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - JULY 14, 2021 PLANNING
COMMISSION MINUTES
Approve the Planning Commission Minutes of July 14, 2021.
Motion By Commissioner Dandekar
Second By Commissioner Kahn
Page 330 of 359
2
Ayes (6): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Dandekar,
Commissioner Hopkins, Commissioner Kahn, and Commissioner
Shoresman
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (6 to 0)
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
4.a 468/500 WESTMONT AVE (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020) REVIEW
OF TTM NO. 3157, 23 LOT SUBDIVISION AND ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW
Commissioner Kahn declared a conflict on this item. (Cannon, his
employer, provides the Project Representative and Engineer for this
project. At 6:05 p.m., Commissioner Kahn recused himself and left the
room. )
Associate Planner Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report,
expounding on focus topics that arose in the original hearing, and
responded to commission inquiries with input from Community
Development Director, Michael Codron, Deputy Community Development
Director, Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney, Markie Jorgensen, and
Supervising Civil Engineer, Hal Hannula.
Applicant representative, Katie Rollins, provided a brief overview of the
project and areas of concern raised previously by the Commission and
public, and responded to questions raised.
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
David Brodie
Robert Schroeder
Maryann Stansfield
Eileen Amaral
Genevieve Czech
Adolf Czech
Becky Keen
Laurie Fenwick
--End of Public Comment--
Page 331 of 359
3
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
The Commission directed staff to include a full account of alternative traffic
circulation options in their report to City Council.
Motion By Commissioner Hopkins
Second By Commissioner Shoresman
Adopt a Resolution entitled, "A Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, recommending the City Council
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Review and
Tentative Tract Map No. 3157 to create twenty-three (23) residential lots in
the Low-Density (R-1) Zone (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020)." with the
following condition modification and added condition:
Modification to Condition #4 - Plans submitted for final map recordation
shall include the Biological Easement required by mitigation measure BIO-
11. This easement shall include all the area between the creek top of
bank, or current riparian area, or replanted areas which are planted
directly adjacent to the creek, whichever is furthest from the centerline
of the creek. The easement shall also cover all areas identified for
Cambria morning glory replanting required by mitigation measure BIO-1.
New Condition - to include the development of a Construction
Communication Plan.
Ayes (4): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Hopkins,
and Commissioner Shoresman
Noes (1): Commissioner Dandekar
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (4 to 1)
4.b 950/990 AERO DRIVE (ARCH-0165-2020) REVIEW OF A REQUEST
FOR A USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED
125,500-SQUARE FOOT, THREE-STORY, 204-ROOM, DUAL-
BRANDED HOTEL
Senior Planner Shawna Scott presented the staff report and responded to
Commission inquiries.
Applicant representative, Pamela Jardini, provided an overview of the
project and responded to questions raised by the Commission.
Page 332 of 359
4
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
None
--End of Public Comment--
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
Motion By Commissioner Kahn
Second By Commissioner Hopkins
Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, Approving The Airport Hotel
Project including approval of a Planning Commission Use Permit to allow
a hotel in the Business Park Zone, and associated exceptions to Lot
Frontage Side Parking Standard, Loading Space Standard, and Sign
Regulations for wall signs as represented in the staff report dated July 28,
2021, and adoption of the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ARCH-0165-2020, USE-0294-2019, and EID-0650-2020; 950
and 990 Aero Drive)" with a Condition amendment:
Condition #47 - The time frame when no left turn is permitted should be
specified on the proposed signage, subject to approval by the Public
Works Director.
Ayes (6): Chair Jorgensen, Vice Chair Quincey, Commissioner Dandekar,
Commissioner Hopkins, Commissioner Kahn, and Commissioner
Shoresman
Absent (1): Commissioner Wulkan
CARRIED (6 to 0)
5. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST
Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey provided an update
of upcoming projects.
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for August 11, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
Page 333 of 359
5
_________________________
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/202X
Page 334 of 359
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT:Review of a Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3157) to create 23 residential lots on a 4.98-
acre site within the Low-Density Residential (R-1) zone. Project includes the extension of Stanford
Drive, which will connect to an extension of Cuesta Drive. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration is proposed (CEQA).
PROJECT ADDRESS:468/500 Westmont Ave.BY:Kyle Van Leeuwen, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7091
E-mail: kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER:SBDV-0169-2020,FROM:Tyler Corey, Deputy Director
EID-0170-2020
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 3157
and adopt the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SITE DATA
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) application to subdivide the subject parcel
into 23 residential lots. No residential development is proposed at this time; however, recordation of
the map would require the installation of public improvements, including new roads, water,
wastewater and storm water infrastructure (Attachment 2, Project Plans and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map). To accommodate the onsite improvements, 86 ornamental, native and non-native trees would
be removed, 51 of which are identified as subject to tree removal permitting and compensatory
requirements.
Applicant Andrew G. Meinhold,
Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors
Trust
Representative Katie Rollins, Cannon
Zoning Low-Density Residential (R-1)
General Plan Low Density Residential
Site Area 4.98 acres
Environmental
Status
Initial Study-Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND)
Meeting Date: May 26, 2021
Item Number:
Item 2
Packet Page 3Page 335 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 2
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
Review the project for consistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations and applicable
City development standards and guidelines. Planning Commission (PC) review is required for
projects that include the subdivision of five or more lots (Subdivision Regulations, Table 1). The PC’s
role is to make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed subdivision and associated
environmental review.
2.0 PROJECT STATISTICS AND SETTING
TABLE 1: SUBDIVISION: GROSS AND NET LOT SIZE
Lot Gross Lot Size (sf) Net Lot Size* (sf) Lot Gross Lot Size (sf) Net Lot Size*
sf)
1 24,451 20,109 13 6,000 Same
2 11,283 9,265 14 6,000 Same
3 9,750 8,976 15 6,000 Same
4 7,884 6,598 16 6,000 Same
5 9,115 7,468 17 6,533 Same
6 10,097 7,931 18 6,001 Same
7 8,868 6,823 19 6,691 Same
8 6,374 Same 20 6,298 Same
9 6,000 Same 21 6,117 Same
10 6,000 Same 22 9,283 Same
11 6,000 Same
12 6,000 Same Minimum Req Net 6,000
Net lot size excludes areas between creek top of bank
2.1 SETTING
The project site is located adjacent to the northern city limit line just west of Highway 1. The 4.98-
acre site is located at the terminus of the east and west portions of Westmont Avenue and the northern
terminus of Cuesta Drive and Stanford Drive. Existing development on the project site includes a
residential structure and associated accessory structures, a pool, and other site improvements.
Vegetation on the property includes a freshwater forested/shrub wetland with associated riparian
habitat that extends through the western portion of the site. The site is generally comprised of
developed/ruderal land, riparian habitat, and annual grassland. There are 177 ornamental and native
trees throughout the project site.
Surrounding land and Zoning are as follows:
West: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
North: Cal Fire San Luis Obispo Unit Headquarters (Fire Station #12), outside city limits.
East: Single- and multi-family residences zoned Low-Density (R-1) and Medium-Density (R-2).
South: Single-family residences zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1).
Item 2
Packet Page 4Page 336 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 3
3.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW
The project was reviewed by the City’s Tree Committee on May 17, 2021 for consistency with the
Tree Regulations. The Tree Committee (TC) recommended that, with the inclusion of the
recommended condition of approval for compensatory planting, the PC find the proposed tree
removals consistent with the City’s Tree Regulations (Attachment 3, Tree Committee Staff Report
and Draft Minutes). The TC recommended that the project approval include a condition to provide
compensatory tree plantings at a one-to-one ratio on site, consistent with Municipal Code
requirements, and that compensatory plantings consist of an even mix of 15-gallon and 24-inch tree
box sizes. The recommendation also stipulated that 50% of the required compensatory plantings be
of a native species. This condition has been included in the proposed resolution as Condition #5.
The TC also included in their motion a request that the Planning Commission consider the retention
of several specific trees onsite. This included one eucalyptus within the creek corridor (#114), and
two eucalyptus and one live oak near the southern edge of the property line on proposed lots 23 (#s
33, 34, & 91). Staff does not recommend retention of these trees as retention of the eucalyptus in the
creek corridor is inconstant with wildfire mitigation measure W-1, and retention of trees near the
southern property line would require a redesign of the stormwater treatment/retention system and
changes in lot grading.
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The project must conform to the standards and limitations of the Subdivision Regulations and be
consistent with the General Plan. Staff has evaluated the project and the PC shall consider if the
project is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards, as discussed in this analysis.
4.1 Consistency with the General Plan
The General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), Circulation Element (CE), and Housing Element (HE)
provide policies for the conservation and development of residential neighborhoods. The
Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) also provides policies to preserve and protect natural
resources on the project site. The project is consistent with these policies in several aspects.
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic: Neighborhoods should be protected from intrusive
traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements should favor pedestrians,
bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential streets should be slow. To foster
suitable traffic speed, street design should include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped
parkways, traffic circles, textured crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps,
bollards, and on-street parking and sidewalks.
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections: The City shall provide all areas with a pattern
of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote neighborhood and
community cohesiveness. There should be continuous sidewalks or paths of adequate width,
connecting neighborhoods with each other and with public and commercial services and
public open space to provide continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to
nearby community facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting
commercial areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that would
increase cut-through traffic.
Item 2
Packet Page 5Page 337 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 4
CE Policy 4.1.4 New Development: The City shall require that new development provide
bikeways, secure bicycle storage, parking facilities and showers consistent with City plans
and development standards. When evaluating transportation impacts, the City shall use a
Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
CE Policy 5.1.3 New Development: New development shall provide sidewalks and pedestrian
paths consistent with City policies, plans, programs, and standards. When evaluating
transportation impact, the City shall use a Multimodal Level of Service analysis.
HE Policy 7.3: New residential developments should incorporate pedestrian and bicycle
linkages that provide direct, convenient and safe access to adjacent neighborhoods, schools,
parks, and shopping areas.
The design of the subdivision protects the existing neighborhood from intrusive traffic by only
connecting the two existing streets to the south, avoiding any increase in cut-through traffic between
other existing neighborhoods and Highway 1. The subdivision design also incorporates a potential
bicycle and pedestrian connection to the east, as well as parkways, on-street parking, and sidewalks.
Figure 1: Subdivision Design Circulation Connections
LUE Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new residential
development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this
impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods.
The design of the subdivision integrates with the existing neighborhood by continuing the street
layout of Stanford and Cuesta Drive, including street width, sidewalks, and parkways (see Figure 2
as example).
Item 2
Packet Page 6Page 338 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 5
Figure 2: Cuesta Drive Street Design Connection to Existing
LUE Policy 2.3.7. Natural Features: The City shall require residential developments to
preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks,
wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, and plants.
LUE Policy 2.3.10 Site Constraints: The City shall require new residential developments to
respect site constraints such as property size and shape, ground slope, access, creeks and
wetlands, wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, native vegetation, and significant trees.
COSE Policy 7.7.9 Creek Setback B.: Development approvals should respect the separation
from creek banks and protection of floodways and natural features identified in part A above
buildings, streets, driveways, etc.), whether or not the setback line has been established.
The TTM identifies the dimensions of the creek and existing riparian area. The lots proposed adjacent
to the creek are a larger size so that creek protection measures, such as compliance with creek setback
requirements, can be met and still allow development of the created parcel. The TTM also proposes
no development or grading activities in the southwest corner of the site, where the creek and
associated vegetation is most prominent and established. In all, over 60 coast live oaks, will be
retained within the protected creek corridor area, as well as other native species.
Item 2
Packet Page 7Page 339 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 6
Figure 3: Creek Corridor, trees number in black within setbacks are retained
4.2 Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
Lots Size and Dimensions
The Subdivision Regulations regulates minimum lot sizes in the R-1 zone and sets specific
development standards. The minimum lot size allowed in the R-1 zone is 6,000 square feet with a
minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 90 feet. Lots are also required to have a minimum
street frontage of 20 feet. All of the lots within the proposed subdivision meet these base requirements
for size and dimension. Additionally, the Subdivision Regulations states that any area between creek
banks shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. The TTM has also demonstrated
compliance with this requirement (See Table 1 above).
Corner Lots
Lot 19 of the TTM is the only “corner lot” included in the proposed subdivision. Per Table 3 of the
Subdivision Regulations, corner lots in residential subdivisions shall have a minimum area of 15%
greater than otherwise required and shall be ten feet wider that otherwise required. Lot 19 does
provide a width of no less than 60 feet, consistent with this standard, but is less than 15% larger than
the minimum lot area. Staff has included in the proposed resolution condition #3 which requires the
area of lot 19 to be increased to no less than 6,900 square feet for final map recordation, consistent
with regulations standards for corner lots. This can be achieved by moving the lot line between Lot
19 and lot 20 approximately 2 feet, without compromising Lot 20’s compliance with minimum lot
size or dimension standards. Only minor changes in site grading will be needed with this adjustment
of lot lines.
Item 2
Packet Page 8Page 340 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 7
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA). An Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and is currently
being circulated. The IS/MND was noticed for circulation on April 29, 2021 and will be circulated
until May 29, 2021 for public review. The Planning Commission shall review the environmental
analysis (refer to Attachment 4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration) and provide a
recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of the IS/MND. The following discussion
highlights some of the more significant topics of the environmental analysis.
Biology
The initial study and associated biological survey identified Cambria morning glory within the annual
grassland on site, which is a special-status plant species. Construction of the project would result in
the removal or disturbance of the Cambria morning glory. Implementation of Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 and BIO-2 reduce potential impacts to Cambria morning glory to less than significant. These
measures require implementation of a Rare Plan Mitigation Program that would establish replanting
of Cambria morning glory so that after a 5-year period there would be no net loss of the plant on site.
The project site contains a riparian forest along the onsite creek located in the western portion the
property. The identified riparian forest consists of native riparian trees and shrubs, and native
understory plants are also present within the riparian area. In addition, the Fire Protection Plan
requires removal of non-native trees within the riparian habitat, resulting in the removal of 13 trees,
primarily acacia (silver wattle) trees. The proposed TTM shows the extent of the riparian area and a
20-foot creek setback, which would be further protected by implementation of mitigation measure
BIO-11, which requires recordation of a biological easement on the Final Map and application of
creek setback standards. No paving or structures would be permitted in the biological easement area,
however, grading activity is proposed in several areas within the creek setback for stabilization, and
placement of rip rap pads are proposed within or adjacent to the setback1. The project requires permits
described in Mitigation Measure BIO-10 for work proposed within the riparian area. The easement
and application of creek setback standards would affect proposed Lots 1–8.
Wildfire
The project area and adjacent lands are identified as low and moderate wildland fire risk in the Safety
Element of the General Plan. The Element states that development shall only be approved when
adequate fire suppression services and facilities are available or will be made concurrent with
development. Parcel upgrades include emergency access, upgraded roads, and necessary utility
connections. To manage wildfire risk associated with placing residents in close proximity to moderate
and high fire hazard severity areas, a Vegetation/Fuel Management Plan for the project site has been
identified in Mitigation Measure WF-1. Additionally, a Wildland Fire Protection Report identifies
mitigation measures to further reduce wildland fire hazards to future development and is described in
Mitigation Measure WF-2. Part of this mitigation measure calls for the removal of non-native plant
species within the creek corridor to manage wildfire risk.
1 Zoning Regulations § 17.70.030 G. Exceptions to Creek Setback: 2. Accessory Structures and Uses. The following items may be
located within the required creek setback without obtaining a discretionary exception unless otherwise noted, provided, that they do
not extend beyond the top of bank into the creek channel; will not cause the removal of native riparian vegetation; will not reduce any
flooding capacity in compliance with the City’s flood damage prevention regulations; in total occupy not more than one -half of the
total required creek setback area; and are consistent with other property development standards of the Zoning Regulations.
h. Natural flood control and stormwater improvements, including vegetated buffers, bioswales, and rain gardens.
Item 2
Packet Page 9Page 341 of 359
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
468/500 Westmont
Page 8
5.1 Comments Received
Comments were received from the State Department of Toxic Substances Control recommending
certain broad-based evaluations be included in the MND Hazards and Hazardous Materials section.
In review of these recommendations, staff finds that the Initial Study sufficiently identifies the
potential impacts related to hazardous materials for this project and project site. Given the project’s
size, location, and surroundings, potential impacts would be mitigated by Mitigation Measures AQ-
3, AQ-4 and AQ-5. This was the only comment received at the time of publication of this report. The
applicant has agreed to all mitigation measures proposed specific to this project. The IS/MND shall
constitute the complete environmental determination for the project.
5.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including; Planning,
Engineering, Utilities, Fire, Building, Office of Sustainability, Natural Resources and the City
Arborist. Comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as conditions of approval.
6.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES
6.1 Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional
information or analysis required.
6.2 Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that cite the basis
for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Subdivision Regulations,
Zoning Regulations or other policy documents.
7.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map & Phasing Plan
3. Tree Committee Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes 5.17.21
4. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Item 2
Packet Page 10Page 342 of 359
CityofSanLuisObispo, Council Agenda, CityHall, 990PalmStreet, SanLuis
Obispo
Minutes - Draft
Planning Commission
Minutes
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, May 26, 2021
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on
Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:07 p.m., via teleconference, by Chair Robert Jorgensen.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, Mike Wulkan, Vice Chair Nicholas
Quincey, and Chair Robert Jorgensen
Absent: Commissioners Michael Hopkins, Steve Kahn, and Michelle Shoresman
Staff: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Deputy Community
Development Director Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney Markie Jorgensen,
and Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian
1. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR
QUINCEY, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and Shoresman absent) to
approve the Planning Commission Minutes of April 28, 2021.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comments:
None
End of Public Comment—
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Review of a Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3157) to create 23 residential lots on an existing 4.98-
acre site within the Low-Density Residential (R-1) zone. Project includes the extension of
Stanford Drive, which will connect to an extension of Cuesta Drive. An Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration is proposed (CEQA); Project Address: 468 & 500 Westmont. Case
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020; Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust/Andrew G.
Meinhold, owner/applicant.
Page 343 of 359
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 26, 2021
Page 2 of 3
Associate Planner Kyle Van Leeuwen presented the staff report and responded to Commission
inquiries with input given by Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, Transportation
Manager Luke Schwartz, and Community Development Director Michael Codron.
Applicant representative, Katie Rollins, Canon Corporation, and Kevin Merk, project
biologist, provided a brief overview of the project and responded to questions raised.
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
Maryann Stansfield
Becky Keehn
Robert Schroeter
Rayleen Wight
Genevieve Czech
Adolph Czech
Eileen Amaral
End of Public Comment—
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR QUINCEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER
WULKAN, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and Shoresman absent) to
continue this item to the June 23, 2021 Planning Commission meeting to allow for completion
of the environmental review period, incorporating all comments given during the 5/26/2021
meeting, directing staff to work with the applicant to review alternative grading concepts to
preserve as many large trees as possible, and to address concerns raised related to
transportation and traffic impacts.
3. Review of the City’s Public Draft Parks + Recreation Blueprint for the Future: 2021-2041
Parks and Recreation Plan and General Plan Element Update) that will supersede the 2001
Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element. A Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is
recommended for the project; Project Address: Citywide; Case #: GENP-1942-2018 &
EID-0150-2021; Zone: Citywide; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Parks and Recreation Director Greg Avakian introduced the plan and Senior Planner Shawna
Scott presented the staff report and Mr. Avakian and Ms. Scott responded to Commission
inquiries.
Page 344 of 359
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 26, 2021
Page 3 of 3
Chair Jorgensen opened the public hearing.
Public Comment:
None
End of Public Comment—
Chair Jorgensen closed the public hearing.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DANDEKAR, SECOND BY
COMMISSIONER WULKAN, CARRIED 4-0-3 (Commissioner Hopkins, Kahn, and
Shoresman absent) to adopt a resolution entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE
PARKS AND RECREATION BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE: 2021-2041 (PARKS AND
RECREATION PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT UPDATE) (GENP-1942-2018,
EID-0150-2021; CITYWIDE)”
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
4. Agenda Forecast
Deputy Community Development Director Tyler Corey provided an update of upcoming
projects.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:46 p.m. The next scheduled Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission for Wednesday, June 9, 2021 has been cancelled. The following Regular Meeting
of the Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 23, 2021, 6:00 p.m., via
teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: 07/14/2021
Page 345 of 359
Page 346 of 359
Page 347 of 359
Page 348 of 359
Page 349 of 359
Page 350 of 359
Page 351 of 359
Page 352 of 359
Page 353 of 359
Page 354 of 359
Page 355 of 359
Page 356 of 359
Page 357 of 359
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of May 17, 2021 Page 1
Minutes
TREE COMMITTEE
Monday, May 17, 2021
Special Meeting of the Tree Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Tree Committee was called to order on Monday, May
17, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference by Chair Alan Bate.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Daniel Canella, Elizabeth Lucas, Allen Root, Emily Rosten,
Vice Chair Jake Minnick and Chair Alan Bate
Absent: Committee Member Rodney Thurman
Staff: Anthony Whipple, Urban Forester and Megan Wilbanks, Deputy City Clerk
PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
None
End of Public Comment--
TREE REMOVAL APPLICATIONS
1.468 & 500 Westmont Ave. Review of the proposed removal of 51 onsite trees and replanting
of at least 20 street trees on site, with the remainder of compensatory tree plantings required
as a condition of approval. Compensatory planting will be required at a rate of 1:1 onsite or
2:1 offsite, consistent with Tree Regulations standards. Tree removals are proposed to facilitate
a proposed tract map development (TR 3157), a 23-lot subdivision in the Low-Density
Residential (R-1) zone (SBDV-0169-2020).
Associate Planner, Kyle Van Leeuwen, provided a presentation and responded to Committee
inquiries.
Public Comment:
Becky
Genevieve Czech
End of Public Comment—
Page 358 of 359
Minutes – Tree Committee Meeting of May 17, 2021 Page 2
The applicant’s representative, Katie Rollins with Cannon, responded to comments and
questions from Tree Committee Members.
ACTION: UPON MOTION OF VICE CHAIR MINNICK, SECONDED BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER ROSTEN, CARRIED 5-1-1 (Member Root dissenting and Member Thurman
absent), to recommend that the Planning Commission approve the project with the following
recommendations:
All regulated trees shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio, on the site, with 15-gallon or 24-inch
box trees
Require 50% of the replacement trees to be native species
Require the developer or the property owner to irrigate and maintain replanted trees until
they are established
Retain tree #33, #34, #91, and #114
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. The next Special Meeting of the Tree Committee is
scheduled for Monday, June 28, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference.
APPROVED BY THE TREE COMMITTEE: 06/28/2021
Page 359 of 359
9/8/2021
1
468/500 Westmont Avenue
SBDV-0169-2020 & EID-0170-2020
REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO CREATE 23 RESIDENTIAL
LOTS ON A 4.98-ACRE SITE WITHIN THE LOW-DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE. PROJECT INCLUDES THE EXTENSION OF
STANFORD DRIVE, WHICH WILL CONNECT TO AN EXTENSION OF
CUESTA DRIVE. AN INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION IS PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION.
September 7, 2021
Applicant: Alice Jo Meinhold Survivors Trust
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract
Map No. 3157 and adopting the associated
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
1
2
9/8/2021
2
SS2
Project Description
4
Tentative Tract Map (TTM) to subdivide the subject
parcel into 23 residential lots:
Extension of Stanford Drive & Cuesta Drive
Sidewalks and Parkways
Water, Wastewater, & Stormwater Infrastructure
Potential Bike/Ped Connection
Removal of 86 trees – Retention of 91 trees
Creek Setbacks applied to lots adjacent
3
4
Slide 3
SS2 Can you outline the project site?
Scott, Shawna, 9/7/2021
9/8/2021
3
Subdivision Design
6
5
6
9/8/2021
4
Subdivision Design
7
Previous Review – Planning Commission
8
•May 26, 2021: PC reviewed the project continued the hearing to
allow for the completion of the 30-day public review period for the
IS/ND and to allow for staff to address public comments.
•July 28, 2021: PC recommended adoption of Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the project
with the following conditions of approval:
•Compensatory tree plantings as recommended by the Tree
Committee (COA # 5, Council Packet page 202)
•Construction Communication Plan (COA # 6, Council Packet
page 203)
•PC also asked staff to provide the City Council with further
analysis on traffic and circulation (refer to Council Packet page(s)
180-183)
7
8
9/8/2021
5
Consistency with Subdivision Regulations
9
Size: All lots are consistent with standards for lot depth,
width, and net area.
Grading: Natural contours of the site have been largely
preserved; pad development proposed is associated
with required drainage and water management.
Access: New subdivision is integrated with existing
tracts. Street and sidewalk patterns continued.
Lot Lines: Perpendicular to the new street frontages,
logical lot patterns.
Creeks: Creek is preserved in an essentially natural
state. Lots adjacent have accommodated creek
setbacks.
Consistency with Major City Goal
10
Housing and Homelessness:In order to expand housing
options for all, continue to facilitate the production of
housing, including the necessary supporting infrastructure,
with an emphasis on affordable and workforce housing.
Collaborate with local non- profit partners and the county,
the state, and federal governments to discover and
implement comprehensive and effective strategies to reduce
chronic homelessness.
9
10
9/8/2021
6
General Plan Consistency
11
LUE Policy 2.2.3 Neighborhood Traffic:Neighborhoods should be protected
from intrusive traffic. All neighborhood street and circulation improvements
should favor pedestrians, bicyclists, and local traffic. Vehicle traffic on residential
streets should be slow. To foster suitable traffic speed, street design should
include measures such as narrow lanes, landscaped parkways, traffic circles,
textured crosswalks, and, if necessary, stop signs, speed humps, bollards, and
on-street parking and sidewalks.
LUE Policy 2.2.4 Neighborhood Connections:The City shall provide all areas
with a pattern of streets, pedestrian network, and bicycle facilities that promote
neighborhood and community cohesiveness. There should be continuous
sidewalks or paths of adequate width, connecting neighborhoods with each
other and with public and commercial services and public open space to provide
continuous pedestrian paths throughout the city. Connectivity to nearby
community facilities (such as parks and schools), open space, and supporting
commercial areas shall also be enhanced, but shall not be done in a method that
would increase cut-through traffic.
General Plan Consistency
12
LUE Policy 2.3.9 Compatible Development :The City shall require that new
housing built within an existing neighborhood be sited and designed to be
compatible with the character of the neighborhood. Compatibility for all
development shall be evaluated using the following criteria.
a)Front Setback Patterns:New development shall match the typical range of
setbacks used in areas adjacent to the project
b)Landscaping:New development shall repeat or enhance the landscaping
provided in parkway areas (if any exist) along street frontages
c)Rhythm of Development:New development shall reflect the rhythm of
existing development in the area including features such as setbacks and
façade widths along the front setback
d)Street Orientation:New development shall match the general orientation of
existing residential structures in the adjacent area and shall provide an
inviting façade facing public streets.
11
12
9/8/2021
7
Inclusionary Housing
13
The project is subject to Inclusionary Housing Requirements
The project will need to dedicate one lot as affordable or pay
in-lieu fee of 5% of estimated building valuation.
Dedication or in-lieu fee paid prior to final map recordation;
Or, as otherwise provided by written agreement between the
developer and City, to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
This is a requirement of the Zoning Regulations. No condition
warranted unless to specify the exact timing of payment.
Traffic Analysis: Westmont Ave – East
(Council Packet pages 180-181)
14
Increase in unsafe left-hand turns on/off Hwy 1
Does not address issue on Cuesta and Stanford
13
14
9/8/2021
8
Traffic Analysis: Westmont Ave – West
(Council Agenda Packet pages 181-182)
15
Creates impact to creek – conflict with policies
Does not address issue on Cuesta and Stanford
Traffic Analysis: Westmont Ave – East to West
(Council Agenda Packet pages 180-182)
16
Connecting
Westmont (East to
West) provides a
new “cut-through”
option homes to the
north. Sending
drivers to the
unprotected left
turn. Directly in
conflict with policy.
15
16
9/8/2021
9
Traffic Analysis
17
Connecting Stanford and Cuesta Drives is consistent with the City’s
Policies and Standards
Existing street widths on Cuesta and Stanford Drive, and their
connection, are consistent with City Engineering Standards.
Improves access for emergency services and larger vehicles (Trash
Collection), where there is currently no appropriate turnaround.
The connection of Cuesta Drive to Stanford Drives does not create a
new “cut-through” route to or from Highway 1
Traffic thresholds for a residential local street per the General Plan
Circulation Element are 1,500 vehicles per day. About 520 maximum
expected trips would be expected if all vehicles accessed new
homes from one street (two streets connect).
SS5
Environmental Review
18
Draft Initial Study public review period, April 29to May 29, 2021
Comments received during the public comment period, including at
the May 26, 2021PC hearing, where reviewed.
Additional site visits - pertinent information was added to the Initial
Study to better clarify evaluations of the project and project site.
No new or increased impacts were identified in connection to this
additional information, and no new mitigation measures are
warranted.
PC considered amended Initial Study at July 28, 2021 public
hearing and recommended adoption of IS/MND.
17
18
Slide 17
SS5 Delete "is seen as the best option for the project" and replace with: Proposed plan to
connect Standford and Cuesta Drive is consistent with Circulation Element and City
standards:
Scott, Shawna, 9/7/2021
9/8/2021
10
Correction for Resolution
19
Westmont Ave is also referred to as Westmont Drive in some instances in
planning documents. The correct street name is Westmont Avenue. Staff is
recommending that the title of the proposed Council Resolution be corrected to
state:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3157
TO CREATE TWENTY-THREE (23) RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE LOW-
DENSITY (R-1) ZONE AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED INITIAL
STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION,
MONITORING, AND REPORTING PLAN PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AS
REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED
SEPTEMBER 7, 2021 (SBDV-0169-2020, EID-0170-2020, 500 WESTMONT
DRIVE AVENUE)
Project Recap
20
Project site is zoned for residential use and
residential lots are proposed.
Subdivision is consistent with Subdivision
Regulations and Engineering Standards.
No exceptions have been requested.
Creek protection and setbacks have been
incorporated into subdivision design.
Environmental Review has identified impacts
and mitigation measures are provided.
19
20
9/8/2021
11
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution approving Tentative Tract Map No.
3157 and adopting the associated Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
Applied Creek Setback
22
Creek located on the project site is not a creek
subject to creek setback requirements.
Project plans identify a 20-foot setback from the
riparian area, in anticipation of the application of
creek setbacks.
Lots were specifically designed to include
appropriate creek protection.
21
22
9/8/2021
12
Environmental Review: Biology
23
Staff actions in connection to biological assessment:
1. Visited the site in January of 2020.
2. Reviewed subdivision submittal documents,
including initial Biological Resource Assessment.
3. Reviewed the initial study draft prior to release for
Public Comment.
4. Conducted additional site visit on June 10
th.
5. Revied additional correspondence and Memos
regarding biological concerns.
Biology: California Red Legged Frog
24
Site does not provide breeding habitat for the CRLF.
The creek on site is intermittent and does not contain
water of sufficient depth long enough for CRLF larvae
to complete metamorphosis.
Additional pools south of the site also lack sufficient
depth for CRLF.
CRLF has been recorded 0.4 miles from project site.
This recorded location is separated by State Route 1,
which is a barrier to movement and dispersal of
CRLF.
23
24
9/8/2021
13
Biology: California Red Legged Frog
25
Mitigations:
Preconstruction survey for special status wildlife (BIO-4).
Installation of creek protective measures to protect creek
corridor and wildlife on the site during construction (BIO-
6).
Biological monitoring during site work (BIO-7).
Environmental Review
26
Biology/Wildfire/Creek
Retention of trees in the riparian area would be
inconsistent with the Fire Protection Plan.
Staff does not recommend retention of the non-
native trees, but compensatory planting will be
required. This will slightly alter the where the edge
of riparian corridor is measured.
25
26
9/8/2021
14
Environmental Review
28
Biology/Wildfire/Creek
Modification to Condition #4
Plans submitted for final map recordation shall include the
Biological Easement required by mitigation measure BIO- 11. This
easement shall include all the area between the creek top of bank,
or current riparian area, or replanted areas which are planted
directly adjacent to the creek,whichever is furthest from the
centerline of the creek. The easement shall also cover all areas
identified for Cambria morning glory replanting required by
mitigation measure BIO-1.
27
28
9/8/2021
15
Alternative Grading
29
PC directed staff and the applicant to evaluate alternative
grading concepts that may facilitate tree retention.
Subdivision as proposed complies with all
subdivision regulations and engineering standards.
Modifying the subdivision to protect trees would
bring the project out of compliance with these
requirements.
Tress located in low-lying areas are especially
difficult to retain, as these areas are needed to
retain stormwater without drastically changing the
grading.
29
30
9/8/2021
16
31
32
9/8/2021
17
33
34
9/8/2021
18
Previous Review – Tree Committee
36
TC recommended the PC find the project consistent
with the City’s Tree Regulations
Condition of approval for compensatory planting.
Plantings shall be an even mix of 15-gallon and 24-
inch tree box sizes.
50% of the required compensatory plantings be of a
native species.
35
36
9/8/2021
19
Previous Review – Tree Committee
37
TC recommended the PC consider protection of
specific trees
Tree #114 is a non-native tree within the creek
corridor.
Retention of this tree would conflict with Fire
Protection Plan & wildfire mitigation.
Tree #s 33, 34, & 91
Trees are located on, or directly adjacent to,
stormwater treatment/retention system.
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
38
TC recommended the PC consider protection of
specific trees
Tree #114 is a non-native tree within the creek
corridor.
Retention of this tree would conflict with Fire
Protection Plan & wildfire mitigation.
Tree #s 33, 34, & 91
Trees are located on, or directly adjacent to,
stormwater treatment/retention system.
37
38
9/8/2021
20
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
39
1. Exacerbates Climate Change and undermines a major City Goal:Climate
Action,Open Space & Sustainable Transportation To proactively address the climate
crisis, continue to update and implement the Climate Action Plan for carbon neutrality,
including preservation and enhancement of open space and the urban forest, alternative
and sustainable transportation, and planning and implementation for resilience.The World
Health Organization has stated that Climate Change is the number one threat to human
health.
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
40
2.Is Incompatible with Affordable Housing. The project is not dense enough to
provide for workforce and affordable housing. The lot sizes are calculated to support
luxury homes. The City has a major City goal: Housing and Homelessness
to emphasize “affordable and workforce housing. Collaborate with local non- profit
partners and the county, the state, and federal governments to discover and implement
comprehensive and effective strategies to reduce chronic homelessness.”
39
40
9/8/2021
21
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
41
3. Has Adverse Neighborhood and Emergency Neighborhood Impacts. The
project negatively impacts established neighborhoods and violates Circulation Plan
section 8.1.4. “Neighborhood Traffic Management The City shall ensure that
neighborhood traffic management projects: A. Provide for the mitigation of adverse
impacts on all residential neighborhoods. B. Provide for adequate response conditions
for emergency vehicles. C. Provide for convenient and safe through bicycle and
pedestrian traffic.” Connecting Westmont through the subject property would allow
much better response conditions for emergency vehicles and reduce unsafe traffic on
Stanford and Cuesta.
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
42
4. Creates excessive traffic on Stanford and Cuesta. This new development
would generate excessive traffic on Stanford and Cuesta unless Westmont is connected to
divert traffic to wider and less winding streets in violation of Circulation element 8.1.7:
“New Project Evaluation The City shall not approve development that impacts the quality
of life and livability of residential neighborhoods by generating traffic conditions that
significantly exceed the thresholds established in Table 4 except as provided under CEQA.
The City shall also not approve development which significantly worsens already deficient
residential neighborhood traffic conditions as established in Table 4 except as provided
under CEQA.”
41
42
9/8/2021
22
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
43
5.Adversely Impacts Red-Legged Frog Habitat. As pointed out in detail by
Robert Schroeter, Phd in this item’s agenda correspondence: “The presence of 8 pools
with standing water in a 1 km stretch of Twin Ridges Creek indicates there is available
amphibian habitat, including for the California red-legged frog. The lack of a formal
survey of the available habitat in Twin Ridges Creek for California red-legged,
prevents an accurate assessment of the potential impact to this species, as a result of
the Project. … This issue can be resolved by conducting an accurate site assessment
and field survey for the California red-legged frog using standard methods by a
qualified specialist with demonstrated experience surveying for California red-legged
frog”.
Specific Adverse Impacts of the Project, which:
44
(B) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified
pursuant to the above paragraphs, other than the disapproval of the housing development project or
the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lowerdensity.
There is no feasible way to mitigate or avoid the first four adverse impacts above except to
disapprove the project because to do so would take more than five public hearings. This project should be
denied and the developer should wait a year to refile a revised project for the subject property which
addresses the above findings.
The fifth adverse impact could be mitigated according to Robert Schroeter Phd, see below. Of
course, if the proposed tentative map is approved without including such mitigation, the red legged frog
habitat would be destroyed, thus making any avoidance of this impact impossible. The project should be
completely revamped to avoid Red-Legged Frog impact.
“Mitigation Measure BIO-XX: Prepare Project-Specific California Red-Legged Frog Habitat
Assessment. Prior to any work in the riparian area, vegetation removal or tract improvements, an
assessment shall be prepared in coordination with, and submitted for review to, USFWS. The
California red-legged frog habitat assessment shall be prepared and processed in accordance with
the USFWS Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-
Legged Frog (USFWS 2005), or the most recent applicable guidance. The assessment shall identify
California red-legged frog aquatic and upland habitat.”
43
44